Petition on USG to be discussed

A day after a group of students submitted a petition to the USG calling for action against on-campus discrimination — specifically by ROTC — others formed a coalition in a show of support for ROTC's presence.

Meanwhile, USG Vice President Jesse Creed '07 scrapped the original agenda for Sunday's USG Senate meeting to set aside 40 minutes to discuss discrimination and the ROTC.

"We really encourage anyone from the student body to come out to the meeting and take part in the discussion — for or against ROTC," Creed said.

The newly created pro-ROTC group, Supporting Princetonians in the Nation's Service, hopes to emphasize the military's positive role on campus, founder Powell Fraser '06 said.

"This is not about politics, not about personal agendas," said Fraser, a former ROTC cadet who is also a 'Prince' columnist. "It's about supporting the people who protect democracy. It's about saying to the guy who gets up at 6 in the morning to run in the rain with his fellow cadets: We support what you're doing, we're not going to hold you accountable for some policy set by the government."

The original petition, submitted Wednesday by Mark Salzman '07, proposes amending the USG constitution to include a nondiscrimination clause. It would also require USG members to push the administration to ban ROTC and military recruiters from campus.

The Defense Department's "don't ask, don't tell" policy excludes openly gay people from serving in the armed forces.

If the USG does not pass the nondiscrimination resolution at the meeting, Salzman — a former member of the 'Prince' editorial board — intends to move forward with a referendum of the student body. The referendum would be held concurrently with USG spring elections, which begin April 17. About 250 students have signed a petition for such a referendum, more than the required 200.

A national policy

Lieutenant Colonel Tim Brown, director of ROTC on campus, defended Princeton's program — which began in 1919 — as a "great Princeton tradition" that provides needed skills to a new generation of leaders.

Brown has never had to apply the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and remove a student from Princeton's ROTC, he said, but he would be forced to if it became clear that a student cadet were gay. "The government makes the policy, but we have to enforce it," he said.

Nevertheless, Brown said, the debate over discrimination is a "good thing." "The purpose of the military is to get up and defend the rights of everyone to have their opinions," he said. "There's no change without talk."

Some critics of the proposed amendment say they support ROTC for its benefits to campus, even if they disagree with its "don't ask, don't tell" policy.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

"I do think the policy is flawed, and eventually will not be the guiding light for what goes on in the military," Fraser said. "Kicking ROTC off campus is not the right way to go about this. We don't have to punish our students for a national policy."

He added that while he would support sending a message to the military against the policy, "the amendment is an overreaction, and it punishes the wrong people."

Serving the nation

Between 10 and 20 students typically enroll in Princeton's ROTC each year. If passed, the amendment would take effect beginning with the Class of 2009 and would not affect current ROTC students.

But opponents say the cost is still too high, since the last two years of training depend on younger cadets to lead.

"This could seriously hurt some people," one cadet said. "It could screw up people's lives. There's no way to cut the program without disrupting the training of people currently in the program."

"In many cases, local action is a good way to support change at a macro level," he added. "But in this case the cost outweighs the benefits."

Salzman said he is open to compromising on the specifics of the plan, and expects ROTC to continue to operate at another campus or in town if the University stops supporting it. "I really think the cost to ROTC students, while material, will be relatively minor, just an inconvenience," he said.

Critics of the amendment say that ROTC embodies Princeton's motto of "in the nation's service and in the service of all nations."

"I think ROTC reflects the pinnacle of what Princeton considers the highest calling here: service to the nation," said one cadet who requested anonymity. "These are people who are willing to give up between four and eight years of their lives, and a significant portion of time at college. And they're not all on scholarship, like I am. They're doing it because they want to be in the military, want to serve the nation."

But Salzman argued that Princeton has a greater obligation to stop discrimination. "Being in the service of the nation can be construed in a number of different ways," he said. "Undoubtedly, serving in the military is a terrific contribution. But there is also something to be said for Princeton being in the service of the nation by refusing to support a policy that is simply wrong."

"Every day the University continues to discriminate is a day there continues to be a black mark on campus," Salzman added. "This issue cannot be taken up soon enough."