ROTC directly benefits a foreign policy that is imperialistic and advocates preemptive war.

Choosing to have ROTC on campus is not a politically neutral choice. It is a choice which supports the current aggressive foreign policy. The pre emptive policy is not limited to Iraq; it will be extended elsewhere.

A campaign to end ROTC is not an attack on students in the ROTC program. They may join the military after graduation or attend West Point if that is their goal. They need not pursue officer training at a non military academy. The students may choose to form a club of individuals interested in the military, but there need not be an institutionally sponsored ROTC program.

If students are choosing ROTC for financial reasons then we are essentially asking them to risk their lives to pay for school. Moreover, we are asking them to put themselves in situations where they cannot think critically or follow their conscience because they must follow orders. Rather than sponsoring ROTC, colleges should develop financial aid programs to ensure that all are able to attend college, regardless of their economic class. Colleges should also lobby our government to increase federal financial aid in the form of grants to ensure that all students are able to attend college regardless of economic class.

The ideal of political neutrality may well be unattainable. Decisions of hiring, research, and funding of faculty all are political decisions. Given this reality, each institution must choose if it is willing to actively support pre emptive war or if it would prefer to allow the military to do its wars on its own. Neutrality is assent to the status quo.

For more information on counter recruitment and anti ROTC campaigns, contact Voices in the Wilderness, 773.784.8065, or luo@vitw.org.