Faculty Senate Invites ROTC Back

About four decades since it voted to ban ROTC from campus, Stanford University’s faculty senate has voted to allow ROTC back on its campus today. Twenty-eight senators voted to allow to allow the program’s reinstatement, while nine voted against it and three abstained.

The vote followed a discussion among the Senate. Ewart Thomas, chair of the ad hoc committee charged with investigating the return of ROTC, gave the reason why the committee recommended its return: “We offer our recommendation today as a way of reducing this [civilian-military] gap . . . we believe [ROTC] will improve the quality of undergraduate education at Stanford for ROTC and non-ROTC students.”

“A huge part our education here at Stanford is to expose us to diverse ways of life, points of view,” stated student Imani Franklin ’13, a student member of the committee. She added that with ROTC on campus, “we’d be able to put a face to military service, to humanize the people who fight our wars. . . .”

In a statement, Stanford University President John Hennessy said about the vote, “Based on the vote of the Faculty Senate, we will begin conversations with the U.S. military about the process for re-establishing ROTC at Stanford.”

He went on to state, “Our country needs innovative, broadly educated military leaders, and we believe that ROTC”s presence on our campus will be mutually beneficial.”

The process to eliminate the program from campus began in the late 1960s amidst the Vietnam War and an accompanying general anti-war sentiment that pervaded the campus. In 1970, the Stanford faculty senate banned ROTC due to concerns over the quality of teaching and punitive clauses, which conscripted any student who dropped out of the ROTC program.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT), passed by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton, allowed homosexual and bisexual individuals to serve in the military, but barred them from openly revealing their sexual orientation and barred superiors from inquiring into their sexuality as well. Those who opposed ROTC’s return to campus argued that the policy was discriminatory and that so long as it existed, ROTC could not be allowed to return.

In spring 2010, DADT’s repeal appeared to be imminent, the faculty senate decided to launch an ad hoc committee to review the prospect of having ROTC on campus. Leading this push was former Secretary of Defense William Perry and prominent historian David Kennedy, both Stanford faculty members.

Kennedy reiterated his support today, saying, “The military provides us all with a public service and a public good. It’s called national security.”

Over the past year, the ad hoc committee researched the history of ROTC at Stanford, differing perspectives on the military, and elicited community opinion. On April 22, it recommended that the faculty senate vote in favor of ROTC, largely on the grounds of the benefit in diversity and community enrichment that it would bring to Stanford.

Students on both sides of the issue have been active in the debate over the past year. LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer) activists were among those who originally opposed ROTC because DADT was still in effect. Since DADT’s overturn, they have opposed it because transgender people are still not allowed to serve in the military.

Regarding the DADT’s impact on the debate, Perry stated today, “We have reached this decision point at Stanford only because congress repealed the DADT.”

Professor of Political Science Gary Segura opposed the measure due to the transgender discrimination argument. He argued that the vote was “premature with respect to Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.” He emphasized that the military’s policy toward transgendered students would ensure that there was always “an asterisk on our non-discrimination policy.”

Hennessy stated, “We understand concerns about the military’s continuing discrimination against transgender people, and we share those concerns. But if the leadership of the military is drawn from communities that teach and practice true tolerance, change is more likely to occur.”

In early April, the Stanford student body voted on whether or not ROTC should be allowed to return. About 44% of students were in support of its return, while 17% were opposed. 38% explicitly abstained from the vote, as “Abstain” was a given option. Some of the abstentions can likely be attributed to an abstention campaign run by anti-ROTC groups on campus.

Stanford’s decision follows recent decisions at Harvard and Columbia to allow ROTC to return to their campuses. Moving forward, the reality of an ROTC branch returning to Stanford University in the coming years now rests with the U.S. military.

  • Pingback: After Four Decade Moratorium, Stanford ROTC is Reinstated « All-American Girl for the Restoration of Values()

  • Pingback: Instapundit » Blog Archive » STANFORD FACULTY SENATE votes to bring back ROTC….()

  • Trashhauler

    And yet, somehow, the military will manage to avoid any untoward expressions of unrestrained joy.

  • Chuck Hallman

    As a soldier, I hope the ARmy tells Stanford to pound sand. “Put a human face on the military?” Arrogant, self-absorbed fools have kept ROTC away for 40, I hope we (Army) tack on another 40.

  • Matt

    With undergrads like Imani, I’m guessing that most of you won’t be all that interested in getting to know who is fighting your wars such as it is. Nice of you to deign to look at our faces though. Stanford ROTC adds very little to the military frankly. What it does do is add some little people to your campus that would not have been able to afford it otherwise. Maybe you can have them work in the kitchen or picking up trash on campus, then you could see their faces and so forth. Enjoy your naivety.

  • Brian

    “44% of students were in support of its return, while 17% were opposed. 38% abstained from the vote”

    Who measures number of people who abstained? The correct way of saying this is that of people who voted, 72% supported and 28% opposed. Phrasing it the way you did seems to be an attempt to minimize the supporters.

  • motionview

    About 44% of students were in support of its return, while 17% were opposed. 38% abstained from the vote. Some of the abstentions can likely be attributed to an abstention campaign run by anti-ROTC groups on campus.

    Going to lose a vote? Abstain! Flee the state! That is fundamentally anti-democratic, and it is long past time that liberals, real liberals, true open-minded, compassionate, scientific, logical people, at Stanford and across America, take a long hard look at their “progressive” allies.

  • Autumn Carter

    On the student ROTC ballot, students were given 3 choices: Yes, No, and Abstain. The abstentions were the actual selections of 38% of the individuals who answered the question.

    – Autumn Carter, Editor-in-Chief

  • Pingback: Friday Linkzookery – 29 Apr 2011()

  • richard40

    I think bringing back ROTC will actually be more of a benefit to Stanford that to the military. The Stanford Senate made a good point that it is dangerous for Stanford to be estranged from the people that defend this country. Stanford will benefit a lot from having the diverse viewpoints (much better than just diverse races) that military students will bring.

    To those that want the military to tell them to stuff it, I disagree. We are better than that. If they want to mend some fences, we should give them a chance. And perhaps there are a few Stanford students that will actually make good officers. Not everybody at the elite colleges are elitist, idiotic, leftie snobs. Remember that Gen Petraeus went to some elite colleges, and he is one of the best.