op-ed Tolerance, an answer to looming recruitment

Author: Max Nardini

Military recruiting at Middlebury always stirs up a buzz. This is understandable, as the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy conflicts with the College's antidiscrimination statement, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of, among other things, sexual orientation. Some members of our community argue that we should forgo the $1.8 million in federal funds and bar these recruiters from our campus. However, such action would deny us the opportunity to raise effective opposition to the military's pernicious policy.

"Don't' Ask, Don't Tell," originally part of Bill Clinton's efforts to lift the prohibition on gays in the military, has proven ineffectual. Since its inception in 1993, over 10,000 servicemen and women have been discharged for openly avowing their sexuality. More than 300 of those discharged were linguistic experts, many fluent in Arabic and other languages in high demand by the government. According to the Washington Post, replacing these servicemen has cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

Some maintain that these costs are necessary because openly gay servicemen pose a threat to unit cohesion. However, a December Zogby poll indicates that almost 75 percent of troops surveyed are personally comfortable in the presence of homosexuals. Of the 20 percent who were uncomfortable, only five percent were "very uncomfortable." Furthermore, Zogby reported of troops who knew of a homosexual in their unit, only 27 percent said that the presence of this homosexual created a "negative impact." Such data indicates that the current policy toward gays in the military is based more on the personal prejudices of lawmakers than on demonstrated fact.

Clearly, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" should be abolished and homosexuals be allowed to serve openly in the military alongside their fellow countrymen. However, this will not be accomplished by barring the military from our campus. Rather, military recruiting has a very positive effect - it focuses our otherwise divided attention on the flawed military policy. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is in effect 365 days a year - however, it is only a major topic of conversation at Middlebury when the military comes to recruit. The military's occasional presence on campus serves as a much needed wake-up call. Were Middlebury to close its doors to these recruiters, many of us would feel very content with ourselves. However, with no "enemy in the field," professors and students alike would "fall asleep at their posts," and cease to concern themselves with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." This policy, however, would still exist.

Now, some argue that denying the military recruiting access at Middlebury will lead to a "snowball effect," provoking many colleges and universities to see the progressive light and follow suit. Unable to effectively recruit, the federal government would then be forced to alter its policy. This argument does not hold. In the wake of Rumsfeld v. FAIR, even Yale University itself, the leader in the fight against the Solomon Amendment, has allowed military recruiters back on campus. Apparently, the prospect of losing $350 million in federal funds proved too great, as reported by Yale Daily News.

Even if many institutions were to prohibit military recruiting, the government would still have a remedy. Writing for the unanimous Court, Chief Justice Roberts is quite clear in Rumsfeld v. FAIR that the Constitution grants Congress extensive authority to raise and maintain the military, which "includes the authority to require campus access to military recruiters" [emphasis mine]. In other words, instead of conditioning federal funds on an institution's voluntarily allowing the military to recruit, Congress could constitutionally pass a law forcing all institutions of higher learning to allow this recruiting.

How, then, should we take a stand against the military's discriminatory practices toward homosexuals? We certainly should not direct our protests against the recruiters themselves. Rather, we should shake hands with these brave officers in thanks while simultaneously lobbying our elected representatives to ensure that the Uniform Code of Military Justice is deserving of their unfaltering allegiance. All students interested in abolishing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" should take the fight off-campus by contacting their congressmen and senators or, better yet, organizing a letter-writing campaign. A single vote cast in Congress holds far more sway than a student demonstration, even if held in front of Old Chapel.

The solution to discrimination is not censorship, but advocacy of tolerance. Given this, I am pleased that the administration will be hosting several forums to discuss the status of gays in the armed forces. In addition, Middlebury should put the federal funds it receives for allowing the military to recruit to purposeful use. Specifically, we should endow a fund, the aim of which is to discourage discrimination and promote diversity. This money, controlled by the Office of Institutional Diversity, would finance student projects aimed at fighting discrimination and fostering community on campus. It could also provide funding for unpaid internships with organizations working for social justice. I can think of no better way to turn an apparent $1.8 million bribe into a tremendous positive for diversity and acceptance.

All this said, it is true that, for many, allowing the military on campus is the harder road. It would be much easier, much "safer," to eschew the recruiters and the discriminatory policy that they represent. However, this would only mask the problem for four years, denying us the opportunity to confront this erroneous regulation and push for real change. We must foster efficacious, not merely cosmetic, opposition to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." For this fundamental reason, we should allow the military to recruit on our campus.

SGA president Max Nardini '08 is from New York, N.Y.