IVORY TOWERS: ROTC: The defender of our liberty?

Ivy League students enrolled in the Reserve Officers Training Corps must adhere to a military policy that excludes gay men, lesbians, and bi-sexuals from their organization. The same students must also adhere to Ivy League school policies which prohibit discrimination against minorities, including homosexuals. At issue for Ivy League ROTC units is how to resolve the direct conflict between the various schools' non-discriminatory policies and the military's ban on homosexuals. ROTC units have been unable to comply with non-discriminatory policies because U.S. military policy bans "persons who engage in homosexual conduct" from active duty. Following much campus debate, Ivy League schools – who have not already voted to discontinue their ROTC units – are reconsidering their current programs. But the decision administrators face is a tough one. Each school faces the dilemma of continuing to allow ROTC to violate non-discrimination policies or eliminating a program that provides student scholarships and the student body with additional diversity. Many administrators hoped President Bill Clinton would end the controversy by upholding his campaign promise to terminate the military's ban on homosexuals. But Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" policy has only complicated the situation. When coupled with inconsistent court decisions, the ROTC debate has mushroomed into a campus controversy. In recent years, 13 cases have been brought to court regarding the ban on homosexuals and none has produced a solution. If the courts had determined that the military's policy is unconstitutional, the ROTC debate would end. However, the courts have never agreed on the constitutionality of the military's policy. For example, Keith Meinhold, a petty officer who was discharged because of his sexual orientation, challenged the policy in a California court. Federal Judge Terry Hatter ruled the military's policy did not comply with the Constitution's equal protection clause and called for Meinhold's reinstatement. However, the case of Joe Steffan, a student who was discharged from the naval academy before he graduated because he was homosexual, ended with a very different verdict. In the Steffan case, Judge Oliver Gasch said the ban was a " rational measure" to prevent HIV transmission in the military. The final outcome of the case is still uncertain since Steffan has appealed the ruling to the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals. Thus divided, the court system has forced Ivy League administrators to grapple with the controversy. Some schools are currently considering discontinuing their programs and have formed special committees to report on the issue. In 1991, Dartmouth College's trustees voted to discontinue the program by April 1993 if the military did not change its policy. This date has since been pushed back to next April so the policies in Washington can be made more clear. Next spring, the trustees will decide if the military's policy meets their guidelines and will decide the fate of the program. "I know there have been conversations on campus about this issue," Associate Dean of Students Barbara Strohbehn said yesterday. "The program is existing as it was before and it is waiting for the decision of the trustees." At Columbia, the university removed ROTC in the 1960s in response to student demands during the Vietnam War, said Cathy Croft, executive director for campus programs. Although the school has not had a unit for decades, the ROTC would not be welcome at Columbia today. "Clearly we would not want any program that discriminates," Croft said. Cornell University has a particularly unique situation regarding ROTC. Cornell is a land grant college of New York and one of the requirements of state institutions is military instruction. Therefore, the college must have ROTC units. But Cornell policy prohibits discrimination against students on the basis of their sexual orientation. The school has tried to clearly distinguish between the school's policy and the military's policy in hopes of keeping both sides of the debate happy, Cornell administrators say. "I think we've tried to make it clear that we separate the policies of our university [from those of ROTC]," said Larry Palmer, vice president for academic programs and campus affairs. Palmer notes that the ROTC is accepted on campus with a "bit of discomfort." He also said university representatives wrote to the Department of Defense two years ago to inform the department of conflicts between state law, military policy, and school rules. ROTC leaders maintain that they are taking undeserved criticism for a policy that they had no part in formulating. They have said they are simply following the policy set down by the president of the United States. "We are not here to purposely discriminate," said Capt. Steve Jones, ROTC enrollment officer at Cornell. "But there is a Defense Department policy." "We have nothing to do with it," Dartmouth ROTC Sgt. Terry Damm agreed. "It's the president's policy and we obey it." Like Cornell, Princeton University has also decided not to terminate its ROTC program and therefore, its relationship with the military. In 1990, following the submission of a report by a special committee looking into the ROTC dilemma, Princeton President Harold Shapiro issued a statement to the Princeton community stating "that the presence of Army ROTC at Princeton is on balance a positive thing and should be preserved." The statement said Princeton needed to better define its relationship with ROTC. Associate Secretary Ann Haliday said Friday that the relationship between Princeton and ROTC is that ROTC is an outside organization and is not a part of Princeton University. "ROTC is considered a recruiting organization who discriminates based on sexual orientation," she said. "The special committee recommended that we make clear the distinction between the university and the outside organization ROTC." But University Assistant Director of Student Life Programming Robert Schoenberg is skeptical of this Princeton policy decision. "I wonder if it's true," he said. "Does ROTC pay Princeton rent? Does it pay for utilities in the buildings it inhabits? Does it pay for advertising? My suspicion is [Princeton] subsidizes ROTC on campus. It is certainly true here [at the University]." Some Princeton faculty members are also cynical of the relationship the school has with the organization. The Princeton faculty senate passed a resolution last Monday calling for the removal of the ROTC from Princeton by June 30, 1994 "unless all regulations restricting the speech of gay men, lesbians, and bi-sexuals are repealed..." Princeton alumni like Erik Markeset are also agitating to remove the unit from campus. When Markeset entered Princeton, the school did not offer an ROTC program. Markeset helped bring a unit to campus and commanded the unit in his senior year. As an officer on active duty, he earned a Meritorious Service Medal and two Commendation Medals. But now Markeset wants the unit discontinued at Princeton because the military discriminates against homosexuals. And as a gay man, Markeset has been agitating for a change in the military's policy. Critics of ROTC cite Markeset as an example that someone who is gay can perform the same duties as someone who is heterosexual. Harvard University is also in the process of reviewing its relationship with ROTC. But Harvard's program is unique because it does not exist on Harvard's campus. Students wanting to participate in ROTC must do so through the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Harvard subsidizes MIT's program so that Harvard students may participate. But Harvard is in the process of deciding whether or not to withdraw its funding because the program at MIT does not adhere to Harvard's non-discrimination policy. A committee has been established at Harvard to "review the situation," said Harvard Dean of Students Fred Jewett. He said Harvard's president, Neil Rudenstine, will report to the faculty on the status of the program sometime this month. "We felt it would be wrong in the long run to continue to directly support something that countered university policy," Jewett said. "Should [Harvard] financially support the program is the question." He added that the university did not want to make a decision before the "situation in Washington is more clear." Even if the military implements the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and makes its language more understandable, some experts have said it is not a practical policy. Furthermore, experts have raised questions about Clinton's policy in regards to ROTC because it prevents a student from speaking freely in class. "If a student speaks about his sexual orientation in a class," Schoenberg said, "does that constitute 'telling?'" "The 'don't ask, don't tell' policy does not meet the criteria of non-discrimination," he added. So as Washington continues to struggle with a question that will affect almost every university and college across the country, students, administrators and faculty members will be focused on President Clinton as they play a waiting game that could determine the future of ROTC.