In January 2011, then-President Ruth Simmons organized a committee to explore the possibility of reorganizing a Reserve Officers’ Training Corps unit on the Brown campus. It was a response to the repeal of the controversial “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” legislation and a challenge by President Obama in his State of the Union address to “all our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and ROTC.”
The committee compiled a comprehensive report covering the long and distinguished history of martial education at the University, the 1969 resolutions that forced the ROTC programs off campus, the current status of the debate and recommendations. In her response to the report, President Simmons supported reaching out to the Department of Defense to expand off-campus ROTC offerings to Brown students. Though many colleges and universities responded to Obama’s challenge, Brown is now the only Ivy League institution without an on-campus ROTC unit.
That was two and a half years ago. Little has been done since. The only step in that direction I am aware of was the creation of Office of Student Veterans and Commissioning Programs, which has a small office in J. Walter Wilson and a lone part-time staffer.
Brown’s lack of urgency in addressing the recommendations and the tone of the original report suggest arrogance on our part, as if people feel we don’t have much to gain by bringing the military closer to Brown. I couldn’t disagree more.
This semester, I shopped ANTH 1232: “War and Society.” Early on, the professor asked for a show of hands: Who in the room had served in the military? Were there any veterans in the room? Not one of the 50 or so students raised their hand. The professor then went on to say she had expected as much. I was disappointed. I don’t doubt the ability of the professor to lead the class, but in a class about war, I felt that somehow I was being cheated out of a fuller discussion, that valuable viewpoints had been lost. When we performed brief interviews on each other, almost no students could claim to have had significant contact with the military in their lives.
I know there are student veterans at Brown, and I hope they are as proud to go here as we are to have them here. But doesn’t this expose a weakness of ours, that we are so distant from something so critical to our understanding of the world? Is it a chink in the wonderful diversity that we pride ourselves on?
I also know that inviting ROTC back to campus doesn’t necessarily increase the number of student veterans. But no one can say the two aren’t paired issues. While I’m not a veteran, I can imagine that it definitely sends a message to those applying to colleges. I am confident, however, that that message is not indicative of how most Brown students and alums feel. In addition to history, the report included polls of both alums and students. 60 percent of alums reported they were “strongly in favor” of hosting ROTC on campus, and 31 percent of students supported taking steps to bring (ROTC) back to campus. 55 percent of students reported they wanted the University to “support” ROTC for its students in some fashion.
There is also a financial aspect. ROTC offers scholarships to many of its participants. Many people who could otherwise not afford to attend college are able to do so on ROTC scholarships, and with Brown’s lackluster financial aid, the lack of ROTC can unfortunately discourage students from applying — a further loss of diversity and opinions.
Currently, Brown students who want to participate in Army, Navy or Air Force ROTC have no options. They are forced to commute to Providence College for classes and exercises, and they receive no credit or official recognition from Brown.
Some students might decry a closer connection with the military on the grounds that Brown should maintain a sort of neutrality when it comes to armed conflict. I would remind them that Brown annually takes in $9 to $11 million in research grants from the Department of Defense. Historically, there has also been an argument that the structured nature of military learning and instruction would be antithetical to the goals of the New Curriculum. For an on-campus ROTC unit to be considered, the University would probably have to grant a few military officers faculty status and allow them to teach the ROTC curriculum. I would ask: Is an increase in academic options antithetical to goals of diversity, openness and free inquiry?
I challenge the University to open its gates to ROTC. Opening our campus to ROTC would help increase the diversity of opinions and perspectives where it is most needed — in our classrooms. On-campus ROTC would expand opportunities for our students and send a strong message of support to student veterans and prospective student veterans alike. It is not the military that needs Brown University — it is Brown University that needs the military.
Walker Mills ’15 is enrolled in a commissioning program with the United States Marine Corps and can be contacted at walker_mills@brown.edu.
ADVERTISEMENT
