April 2007 Issue
Drafting a Solution
Sean Smith '10Throughout its history, militaries have always been confronted with difficult decisions, some strategic, some political. Currently, our military is struggling with a problem that encompasses both the strategic and political, as it tries to balance the need for a sufficient quantity of soldiers, preferably ones that are representative of America, with the need for motivated and dedicated ones. This trade-off of equality and quantity versus quality, is one that the United States military has been struggling with for decades. However, the issue of whether our all-volunteer military is adequate has once again come to the forefront, with President Bush having requested a troop surge in Iraq, while others, including Colin Powell, have said that our troops are already stretched much too thin. Also, U.S. Representative Charles Rangel has periodically been introducing legislation into the House of Representatives to reinstate the draft, citing the need for more upper-class representation in our armed services.
There are two main benefits to a draft, the first of which focuses primarily on the democratic building blocks of equality and diversity. Currently, the upper-class is under-represented in our military, leaving the burden disproportionately on America’s middle-class. The ruling class primarily consists of the upper-class, and when so few upper-class men and women have served, a large disconnect appears between those who make decisions and those who are forced to enact them, a trend that could led to inept and disastrous decision-making. This trend has only been worsening in recent decades, and is unhealthy for our democracy. For example, “in the years after World War II, virtually every member of Congress was a veteran of military service…
Today, only a third of the 535 members of the Senate and the House of Representatives have served” (Military.com). This trend is patently apparent at upper-class Dartmouth; despite a student body of over 4,000, only seven total students participated in the ROTC program fall term, about two tenths of one percent of the total student body. Indeed, many students are completely unaware of Dartmouth ROTC, as if the military and an elite private university are mutually exclusive, a thought that threatens to undermine the American military. Indeed,
several other Ivy League schools, including Harvard and Yale, do not even allow ROTC on campus. If the American military is no longer
representative of the American public, which empirical data suggests, then America is effectively divided into a serving class and a ruling class. A draft may be the best way to restore equality and diversity
to our military while also breaking down societal classes of ‘rulers’ and ‘servers’.
The second, perhaps even larger benefit to a draft is simply that the military is in need of more soldiers as there appears to be a necessity for a larger military. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell has said, “there really are no additional troops” and the United States Army is “about broken” (NYTimes.com). Also, with
a draft, America would have plenty of soldiers available to
secure our porous borders. President Bush’s order in 2006 to
station 6,000 National Guardsmen along the U.S./Mexico border provided only a temporary fix to America’s immigration problem while further straining our already limited military capabilities (CNN.com). Furthermore, with a draft, America would finally have the manpower needed to complete our mission in Iraq, instead of a surge of only 15%, hardly enough to completely secure Baghdad and Iraq’s borders with Syria and Iran. Currently in Iraq and along the USA/Mexico border, America doesn’t necessarily need highly skilled military professionals, people that would be highly motivated and well-trained. Instead, competent but not exceptional troops are more than capable of helping to occupy Iraq or secure our borders, exactly the kind of people a draft would bring in.
On the other hand, there are some significant costs to a draft, which mainly focus on the democratic building blocks of individualism and liberty. There are a number of costs, like the potential damage to our economy by removing part of our work force, but the main cost is the quality of the draftees. An individual’s freedom is suppressed when imposed to do anything, even serve our nation, and it may be antithetical for a nation founded upon liberty and freedom to force our youth to give up several years of their lives to serve the nation. Indeed, some Libertarians go as far to argue that mandatory service is illegal, as the Thirteenth Amendment bans “involuntary servitude.” These draftees, forced to served and give up their personal freedom, may be unmotivated and apathetic, if not resentful and embittered. Thomas Sowell best explains the problem with a modern-day draft:
"Today, a military draft would bring in large numbers of numbers of people who have been systematically 'educated' to believe the worst about this country or, at best, to be non-judgmental about the differences between American society and its enemies. The fact that we could use a larger army of the kinds of people who have already
volunteered to put their lives on the line does not mean that
we can get it by adding warm bodies fresh from our politically correct schools and colleges, where standards and self-discipline are greatly lacking.” (Townhall.com)
While there are some benefits to a draft, analyzing the
cost-benefit trade-off of quantity and equality versus quality,
I have to agree with the decision of our government and Thomas Sowell and to not support a draft. It would be deleterious to the military to have many of my politically-correct peers, many of whom are apathetic about America’s heritage and bitterly opposed to the Iraq War, be forced to enter the military. While the military can teach skills, as I have experienced firsthand, it can not instill fundamental values like patriotism and a willingness to sacrifice, and soldiers
without these intrinsic principles will put their comrades and
our nation at risk. Most Americans recognize this, as an
AP-Ipsos poll found about 70% of Americans are opposed to a draft, and the House had swiftly and conclusively voted down Rangel’s draft proposals (Polling Report). Given the highly sensitive nature of a draft, nearly all politicians would rather leave this entire policy alone. Also, there is a lack of strong interest because there are extremely few groups who are firmly on one side of the issue or the issues. Libertarian Republicans are against it, while hawk ones are for it. Democrats advocating minority rights are for it, while most Democrats are against the Iraq War and a draft. This is not a policy issue with competing organized interests but rather a decision with a complex cost-benefit trade-off that seems to transcend political parties or interest groups. However, despite the fact that most politicians ignore this policy debate, there are still significant problems in our military that need to be addressed, whether with a draft or by another means, and the problems will only worsen if left unaddressed.
In actuality, the best way to increase the size of the military and upper-class involvement may not be to artificially enforce it with a draft. Instead, it could be more effective to endeavor to break down barriers that prevent intelligent and assiduous individuals like Dartmouth students from considering the military as an option. All too often, upper-class or intelligent people are just never presented with the idea of military service, not necessarily that they just do not want to serve. Sowell explains:
"Anti-military academics think they have a right to over-ride their students' rights to reach their own conclusions and make their own decisions, or even to hear a different viewpoint about the military. Patriotic and educated young Americans who want to serve in the military are available. We need to stop academia from sabotaging national defense by blocking them from R.O.T.C. and from even hearing what military representatives have to say” (Townhall.com).
If we break down the barriers that prevent the free flow of information about our military to our students, America will benefit from a well-staffed diverse military, something that all Americans would support.