In the 1960s, student protests of military programs on college campuses turned violent. An ROTC commander's home was fired at with a shotgun. Buildings used for ROTC were sacked and firebombed. Ivy League schools and many other institutions conceded to the violent, anti-military insurgents, and chose to abolish their ROTC programs in protest. After the Vietnam War ended, schools maintaining the ban claimed that they were doing so because they were in disagreement with the Department of Defense's "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy.
While ROTC has returned to Dartmouth and a couple other Ivy League schools in a minimal capacity a decision approved by the Board of Trustees in 1994 the Board received much flak for doing so. Other schools, such as Harvard, Yale, Brown and Columbia University continue to keep ROTC off of their campuses, claiming that it violates their stance of anti-discrimination. In Harvard's case, however, it seems uncertain what their stance or policy is when they accept about $1 million a year in military scholarships. When asked about this inconsistency by The New York Times, Harvard President Drew Faust said, "The way to resolve these inconsistencies is to permit gays and lesbians to serve in the military."
Faust's circular argument suggests that federal policy is responsible for Harvard's duplicity. In reality, Harvard and other institutions that maintain the ban on ROTC are only doing so to appease a base of anti-military protestors no such action has been taken by these schools against the numerous states that have outlawed same-sex marriage or enforced other legislation discriminating against homosexuals. If Harvard and other schools were genuinely interested in repealing DADT, they would instead try to place intelligent minds with strong values in the armed forces to defeat the discriminatory policy.
Boycotting ROTC in no way addresses the root of the issue of DADT. In fact, the DADT policy was not crafted by military leaders; it was devised by former President Bill Clinton, who had never served in the armed forces. The implementation of this policy was opposed by former Republican Senator Barry Goldwater who had served as a Major General in the United States Air Force Reserve and famously said, "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."
Schools that continue to ban ROTC under the pretense of DADT ignore that they deny students a unique and indispensable experience in public service. Military training and experience has a precedence of motivating leaders to seek change. Take U.S. Army Lieutenant Dan Choi for example. He boldly challenged the discriminatory policy by coming out as a homosexual on national television, and more recently gained attention by handcuffing himself to a White House gate. "My soldier training has made me a better activist," he told Newsweek.
Other prominent military leaders, such as Joint Chiefs Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen have denounced the unjust policy before Congress.
It's true that the outright ban on homosexuals preceding DADT was created by military commanders. But the Clinton administration, which had made campaign promises to repeal the ban, was responsible for creating federal legislation that would continue to discriminate against homosexuals. Now that over 100 generals and admirals have called for the repeal of this legislation, it's not really certain what boycotting the military itself is really achieving.
The military is not for everyone, and students at schools that have abolished ROTC have the opportunity to travel to the nearest school which does host the program. That being said, the threat of violence against military presence on school campuses has drastically decreased since the 1960s, and schools such as Harvard and Yale should consider reopening their doors to the program. If these institutions genuinely oppose discrimination, they will encourage their own to fight such injustice on the front lines, to join such brave military leaders as Dan Choi and Mike Mullen.
