In today’s international political environment, the need for the U.S. military to maximize its effectiveness is evident. This need stems from the changing character of warfare, which is constantly reshaped by technological advances. Many scholars, notably Mackubin T. Owens, observe that this development of technology has reduced costs and has changed the patterns in the transfer of information, people, and weapons.1 This has resulted in a reshaping of the pool of potential adversaries to include non-state actors with interests different from that of nation-states. Moreover, the objectives of these actors have also shifted from traditional warfare, as they are now able to attack not only an actor within the system, but the system itself, by causing disruptions that cause cascading failures for political and economic systems.2 These changes reflect a broader phenomenon, referred to as ‘complex irregular warfare’ by Frank Hoffmann in 2006, which poses challenges to the U.S. military, as it must be prepared to fight in wars that bear characteristics of multiple warfare categories. To do so, the military must make changes to the structure of the military and the qualities of the future warrior, effectively maximizing ‘greater responsiveness, strategic mobility and tactical speed’, together with adjustments in reconnaissance technology and precision weaponry.3 Thus, maximizing military effectiveness will combat these pressures induced by changes in warfare.
What are the problems that the military faces? One of the major problems that hinder military performance is the civil-military gap, which causes friction between civilians
and military.4 In the introduction to a comprehensive volume on civil-military relations, Soldiers and Civilians, Peter Feaver, Richard Kohn and Lindsay Cohn discuss the gap between the military and civilians in the United States. There are concerns that the ”gap’ in values or attitudes between people in uniform and civilian society has become so wide that it threatens the effectiveness of the armed forces and civil-military cooperation’5. The authors provide quantitative basis for the debate, via ‘Project on the Gap Between the Military and Civilian Society,’ concluding that there are indications that a growing gap has the potential to undermine military effectiveness in the future.6
There are several characteristics of the civil-military gap that have the potential to undermine effectiveness. Some of those characteristics, as outlined by Suzanne Nielsen and Don Snider are the interpersonal dimension of civil-military relationships and the development of senior military and civilian leaders.7 In this paper, I provide policy recommendations that focus on these characteristics, by focusing on improving ROTC programs, specifically in Ivy League universities. I argue that ROTC in Ivy League universities enhances the military professional expertise by targeting the citizen-soldier rationale, exposing future military personnel to the liberal perspectives and constructing interpersonal connections between the civil-military elites. Although there are civilian and military leaders who graduate from numerous elite liberal arts universities, for the purpose of this paper, I will limit my scope to the Ivy League universities. In the following section, I will provide the strategic context of the ROTC program in civil-
military relations and outline how ROTC programs in Ivy League universities bridge the civil-military gap. Then, I will provide background information on ROTC programs in general and specifically at each Ivy League university. I will conclude by suggesting policy changes to ROTC programs at Ivy League universities, and discussing their potential to increase military effectiveness.
!
U.S. civil-military relations are defined by certain characteristics that result in a civil- military gap, which has the potential to impede the functional effectiveness of the military. The civil-military problematique was elegantly defined by Peter Feaver, as a ‘simple paradox: because we fear others we create an institution of violence to protect us, but then we fear the very institution we created for protection.’8 Scholars note that due to that fear, the U.S. Constitution lays the grounds for civilian control of the military through a system of checks and balances and division of powers and authority.9 Thus, the founding principle of the U.S. civil-military relations is that the military is controlled by civilians.
Consequently, the military is forced to not only focus on winning wars, but to do so under the supervision of its civilian counterparts. In his fundamental work on the subject, The Soldier and the State (1957), Samuel Huntington described the resulting problem of the civil-military gap: balancing between the societal imperative of the
Strategic Context: ROTC in Civil-Military Relations
Conflicting objectives of the military military to be ‘democratically appropriate’10 and the functional imperative of military effectiveness. The military thus faces two sets of objectives that seem to be in conflict with each other. Because of the civilian control of the military, situations may arise, in which the military will be forced to sacrifice its functional imperative due to the civilian demands t, leading to degradation of military effectiveness.
The role of ROTC in Ivy Leagues in bridging the gap
ROTC helps ameliorate the civil-military gap by successfully balancing the focus on both societal and functional imperatives that the military faces. ROTC programs reduce tensions of the societal imperative by targeting the ‘citizen-soldier’ ideal, and encouraging interpersonal links between future military and civilian leaders. In conjunction, using ROTC as a means to bridge the civil-military gap is a good way to balance the two antagonistic imperatives that the U.S. Armed Forces faces.
Firstly, officers that are commissioned after going through the ROTC represent the citizen-soldier ideal, which describes a member of the military with a primarily civilian outlook. Donald Downs emphasizes the importance of aspiration towards this ideal, as it unites ‘deep respect for constitutional principles… with substantial defense obligations and needs’.11 Eliot Cohen illustrates that the concept of citizen-soldier has evolved to mean ‘politically engaged professional officer, who abates none of his rights to freedom of expression despite military discipline’.12 Striving for this ideal fosters understanding in the members of the military of the viewpoints and values of their civilian counterparts, which links the two communities together.
The ROTC program creates the citizen soldiers by allowing students to take courses that encourage critical thinking, and courses that focus on the current values of the U.S. public. Specifically, classes that focus on human rights issues, U.S. policies in conduct of warfare, equality, justice, international law and other topics have the potential to offer ROTC cadets an academic perspective on issues related to the military. In spring of 2012, four of 10 students in the precept13 for the Princeton class titled Causes of War taught by Gary J. Bass were ROTC cadets who learned about current debates regarding the implications of the nature of warfare on the U.S. policies. This example is one of many in which the ROTC cadets are exposed to current academic perspectives on important issues.
With the objective of educating ROTC cadets about the most important principles of the Constitution, democracy, human rights and various other topics, Ivy League schools have a unique opportunity to facilitate communication between ROTC cadets and leading scholars in these fields. According to a report by the Center for Measuring University Performance, in 2012 all Ivy Leagues consistently end up in top 20 (with 1-2 exceptions in each rating that still fall in top 50 group) based on total research expenditures, federal research expenditures, endowment assets, National Academy Membership and number of Faculty Awards.14 This data, compiled with low student-to- faculty ratios15 provides evidence for the potential of Ivy League universities to expose ROTC cadets to the most respected academics in the areas that are important for pursuit of citizen-soldier ideal.
As a result, the soldiers are better equipped to effectively respond to the realities of war, becoming critical thinkers in addition to being warriors. As Col. Scott Manning,
Yale’s Air Force ROTC commander said, ‘just the intellectual capability that Yale brings to those who wear the uniform, and even the cross-towns who will take classes with professors like Paul Kennedy, you can not put a price tag on how that will influence the thinking and development of the U.S. Air Force as an institution,’16
A second aspect of the civil-military
gap that ROTC is capable of influencing
is creating interpersonal connections between soldiers and civilians. The proportion of Americans who serve in the military has been on a steady decline since the end of conscription in 1973, as illustrated in Figure 1.17 Less than one percent of Americans are in military service now. Veterans comprise about 7% of the American public, compared to 13.7% in 1970.18 The statistic reflects isolation of the military that is coupled with a society that is disconnected from the military.19
This indicates that fewer civilians have connections to current or former members of the military now, which results in lack
Figure 1. Military participation
of general public’s knowledge and understanding of the military.
ROTC provides an opportunity for the civilians to communicate with representatives
of the military through interpersonal interactions in academic and social contexts. Collaborations and discussions in academic setting provide a meaningful venue for exchange of views and opinions, while social interactions bear the potential to increase understanding and mutual respect between the two groups.
An important aspect of interpersonal communication that the Ivy League ROTC encourages, is the communication between the future military and civilian elites by exposing the future civilian elites to the military. Kathy Roth-Douquet and Frank Schaeffer published an extensive work on implication of the AWOL phenomenon, or ‘the unexcused absence of America’s upper classes from military service’. The authors frame it as a class issue, claiming that ‘small town, religious, and middle-class Democrats or Republicans are more likely to have someone int he military in their extended group than wealthy partisans of either party living in big cities.’20 Not surprisingly, in polls on confidence of the military, people holding leadership positions in society, who had no military experience, rank lowest on the level of confidence in the military.21
ROTC in Ivy Leagues has the potential to change that situation. As mentioned earlier, Ivy Leagues have a high number of distinguished faculty and small class sizes. In addition, more than 90% of students admitted to Ivy League are in top 10% of their class.22 The schools end up on the top of many rankings, such as U.S. News, Academic Ranking of World Universities, and others. In general, young people attending Ivy
League universities are of high academic quality, and have demonstrated leadership abilities to have been admitted.23 As indicated by reports on the future of military recruitment, military seeks to attract high quality candidates,24 and Ivy League educates students that fit and surpass the enrollment standards for the military. Moreover, the peers that the ROTC cadets will interact with, are likely to be future leaders in the society, judging from their academic success and leadership at the time of admittance. Certainly, not all civilian leaders have graduates from Ivy Leagues. Nonetheless, elite and demanding institutions, such as Ivy Leagues, offer great education, enormous amounts of stress, but a comparable number of opportunities for success. In combination, these factors make Ivy Leagues future leader-breeders, which the military can take advantage of. By encouraging communication between the military represented by ROTC cadets, and the potential future leaders of society, the military and the University will bridge the civil-military gap between the two elites, which will ease communication between the two groups.
Executive Summary: What is ROTC? Historical background
ROTC, or Reserved Officer Training Program, was formed in 1862 with the passage of 1862 Morrill Act, which required universities to include military training in their curriculum in order to receive federal funding. This act provided the foundation for 1916 National Defense Act that established ROTC.
During the Vietnam War, antiwar sentiment has erupted in the United States. In the context of higher education institutions it targeted ROTC as the representation of
military on campus that the war opponents could not tolerate. Protests and violence ensued, resulting in effective ban of ROTC from several colleges. Notably, most Ivy League universities refused to renew the ROTC programs after the Vietnam War was over.25
In 1990s, opposition to the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell renewed the anti-ROTC sentiment in the nation’s universities. In 1994, Congress adopted the Solomon Amendment, which conditioned federal funding on whether the colleges and universities provided the same level of access to the military recruiters that other employers enjoyed on campus. In 2006, a group of 31 law schools and professors formed the Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights challenging the consistency of the Solomon Amendment with the First Amendment freedoms of speech and association. In March of 2006, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled against FAIR, effectively opening access to campus for military recruiters.26 ROTC in the universities exists in the historical context of opposition and criticism.
ROTC today
ROTC’ purpose is to train commissioned officers for the U.S. Armed Forces. The Army, Navy and Air Force all have their own respective ROTC programs, and ROTC graduates can also serve in Marine Corps and Coast Guard. Approximately 40% of commissioned officers in the United States have gone through ROTC27.
Currently, ROTC is offered at over 1,100 U.S. colleges and universities, offering merit-based scholarships that pay up to the full cost of tuition, depending on the branch of the military. Army ROTC offers scholarships to high schoolers, students in
undergraduate and graduate schools and enlisted soldiers. The scholarship consists of two-, three-, and four-year full-tuition scholarship options28, option for room and board instead of tuition, allowances for additional fees and expenses, and a monthly living allowance that starts at $300/month in the first year and increase to $500/month in the fourth year. Recipients of the scholarships are required to complete an eight-year period of service in the Army, 4 years full-time service and 4 years balance in the Individual Ready Reserve.29
Navy and Air Force have similar scholarship opportunities, but the service obligations vary. Air Force requires 4, 6 or 10 years of active duty depending on the type of service. Navy requiring 5 years of active duty, Marine Corps and Navy Nurse Corps – 4. Neither of these services require balance in the Reserves. Navy does not offer NROTC scholarships to active duty Navy applicants.
Typically, the requirements for ROTC consists of three hours of classroom instruction coupled with three hours of physical training per week, a weekly leadership lab and one field-training exercise weekend per semester.30 In the Ivy Leagues, ROTC courses do not receive accreditation from the host universities.
ROTC in Ivies
For the purposes of this paper, I will focus on ROTC program in Ivy League universities, due to the important characteristics of these schools that separate them from similar programs at other universities. In the following section, I will examine current presence of the ROTC program on Ivy League campuses, their location, training opportunities and university accreditation of its courses.
Harvard
ROTC program in Harvard was established in 1926.31 In its rich military history, Harvard has reduced 17 alumni who have received the Medal of Honor.32 Harvard banned ROTC during the Vietnam war, like most other Ivies, and reinstated Naval ROTC in 2011, and Army ROTC in 2012.33
The return on NROTC meant that Harvard was providing funding and administrative support, namely providing the office for the program, transportation to MIT for training, use of Harvard’s athletic facilities for exercises and funding operations of the office and the NROTC director.34 What Harvard is not providing for is an establishment on a unit on campus, and for its Army, Navy and Air Force ROTC programs, Harvard is affiliated with MIT, where cadets train.
The University does not offer credit for ROTC courses, but it has offered University courses that received ROTC credit. Henry Kissinger in 1958-59 and Stephen Rosen in 2002 taught courses on military policy and war strategy in history respectively. ROTC cadets could take these classes to fulfill military history ROTC requirement.35
Since its reestablishment, Harvard ROTC has produced 3 graduates in 2011, and 4 graduates in 2012 and 2013 each.36
Princeton
ROTC at Princeton started in 1919, it was one of the 125 Army ROTC units established by the War Department.37 In the period between the two wars, as many as 2000 Princeton men served in the military38. In 1970, Army and Navy left Princeton after being trustees of Princeton agreed to end all programs by June 1972. However, in 1971, a referendum was held, concluding in favor of bringing ROTC back. In the fall of 1972, Army ROTC was the only program to accept invitation to return to the University as a non-credit program.39
Princeton’s Army ROTC program, for instance, is affiliated with The College of New Jersey, Rider University, Rutgers Camden and Mercer County Community College, together forming the Tiger Battalion40. The quota that the Battalion is faced with is only 15 per year. In the recent years, the number of Princeton ROTC graduates fluctuates between 3 in 2014 and 5 in 2012, to 7 in 2011, 2013 and 2015(expected).41
Currently, Princeton hosts only an Army ROTC program. Beginning fall of 2014, Princeton will see the return of Naval ROTC after more than 40 years of hiatus.42 Both programs will hold training at Rutgers, where ROTC cadets train now, with the University covering the transportation costs.43
Princeton ROTC cadets do no receive university credit for ROTC courses.
Yale
Yale currently offers ROTC in all branches of the military, after reinstatement of Naval and Air Force ROTC programs in 2011, admitting the total of 21 students at the time.44
Yale started offering credit for ‘specifically designed’ courses by ROTC program in 2011.45 However, university credit for courses taught by ROTC faculty is restricted by the number of non-University courses that Yale students can count towards the undergraduate degree requirements, and at this point is not granted.46
Cadets travel to the University of Connecticut once per week for training.47
Cornell
Cornell University’s response to the anti-ROTC sentiments and protests, was the move by College of Arts and Sciences to withdraw credit for ROTC courses, while all the other portions of all three programs were kept intact.48
Cornell University still has all three branches of U.S. Armed Services represented through ROTC on its campus, offering some credits for ROTC classes. All ROTC cadets are required to take a leadership course in their first two years, which they receive a credit for, but they do not receive credit for the required lab course.49
Freshmen then engage in physical training and leadership courses for six hours a week. After commissioning, they receive a salary of about $52,000 which increases to $77,000 in three years.50
The number of graduates commissioned into the Armed Services in the recent years averages to 15 per year51.
Columbia
ROTC at Columbia University started with Navy ROTC in 1916. The program was dissolved in 1969.52 Columbia’s Army ROTC cadets can receive merit-based scholarships of up to $17,000 per year.
Columbia participates in all three U.S. Armed Services branches. The Army ROTC program is based at Fordham University, the Air Force ROTC cadets train atManhattan College, and NROTC cadets take classes at SUNY Maritime.53 Moreover, in the first year of ROTC’s return to Columbia’s campus, there was criticism of its recruiting efforts, which were described as dismal at best. The school’s newspaper states that ROTC recruiting efforts were not allowed at the career fair, activities day, and a number of other recruiting events on campus.54
Dartmouth
Dartmouth ROTC accepted its first cadets in 1951. Following occupation of the administration building by anti-war protesters in 1969, Dartmouth abolished the ROTC program from its campus. In the early 1980s, ROTC was allowed back into Dartmouth, but only Army ROTC has re-entered the University since.
Students participate in ROTC under an agreement with Norwich University. Dartmouth ROTC cadets spend three to five hours a week in classroom and hands-on training in addition to field training exercises. A 32-day leadership course is also
required.55 An Army instructor from Norwich drives several times a week to teach56, so most of the training takes place on Dartmouth campus, with the exception of two yearly training exercises at Norwich University.57 No university credit is currently offered for ROTC classes.
Brown
Brown offers only Army ROTC through an arrangement with Providence College.58 In 2012, Brown Daily Herald has reported that in a few preceding years, between 1 to 8 students were enrolled in the program.59
The 2011 report by Brown’s Committee on ROTC outlines the debate about ROTC on Brown’s campus, where opponents of ROTC frame their criticisms in terms of human rights, and ROTC supporters focus on the freedom of an individual to choose to serve.60
Since 2010, There has been discussion in Brown Daily Herald on whether ROTC courses should be awarded university credit, but the issue remains unresolved to this day.61
University of Pennsylvania
Penn’s ROTC program started with the Navy in September of 1940.62 In the wake of Vietnam War protests, Penn discontinued academic credit for ROTC courses, but did not ban the program itself.63
NROTC is currently the only program that trains on campus, while Penn Army and Air Force ROTC cadets train off campus.
Some undergraduate schools at Penn, namely Wharton, Nursing, and Engineering and Applied Science, accept credit for one or more courses.64 However, the College of Arts and Science’s administration, upon examination of the syllabi and content of ROTC courses, did not deem any of them to be of the required academic standard.65
Synthesis
The only branch of the Armed Services represented on all Ivy League campuses is the Army. With the return of Navy ROTC on Princeton campus this fall, Brown and Dartmouth are the only two schools without the Navy program. Air Force ROTC is only present in half of the Ivy Leagues.
Despite presence of ROTC programs on all campuses, only two Ivy Leagues offer training on campus. University of Pennsylvania only hosts Navy training and still requires Navy and Air Force cadets to commute. The issue of transportation to the place of training is pertinent, as long commute increases the time commitment for cadets, which could be a deterring factor for prospective cadets.
The issue of time commitment is exacerbated by absence of accreditation of ROTC courses. Only Penn and Cornell offer credit for some ROTC courses and only Harvard and Yale’s ROTC programs offer ROTC credit for select faculty-taught courses. This gives ROTC a status of extra-curricular activity in the remaining cases, which puts a further time constraint on cadets.
Due to time spent on commute and on ROTC-specific classes that are not attended by other students, ROTC cadets on campuses spend a significant amount of time separated from the wider community, isolated in military-only environment, which defeats the purpose of ROTC on campus. Both activities also put time constraint on cadets, as they lack the time to ore fully engage in academic and social lives of their respective Universities.
Policy recommendations
In order to optimize the effect of the ROTC programs on civil-military gap and on military effectiveness, I propose a two-fold policy of expansion and integration.
The first task of expansion can be reached by the U.S. policymakers and the Ivy League Administrators working together on effectively advertising ROTC opportunities for incoming freshman.
Policymakers understand that incentives, rather than rules and regulations, will be the most effective way to attract high-quality enlistees.66 Among approaches to future recruiting outlined in a monograph by RAND,a marketing technique applicable to Ivy League ROTC case focuses on military career opportunities that could be relevant in the cadets’ future lives, even if they choose to discontinue military service after the 4-10
years that ROTC scholarship obliges them to.67 This technique addresses the issue that Roth-Douquet and Schaeffer expressed in AWOL, when the parents of high academic quality candidates view their children’s desire to serve as throwing the potential away.68 If the military adapts its marketing techniques to show that an Ivy League graduate with military experience has great career opportunities after the end of compulsory service, the stigma of ROTC in Ivy League parents may be addressed.
Specifically, a permanent highlight feature on the University’s main page will be an effective way to expose the benefits of ROTC program to prospective and current student. This policy will be a low-cost option, as the Universities has the potential to employ several of its students with website building expertise and those with experience in graphic design.
Bigger presence of the military recruiters at career fairs and similar events is crucial to expanding the program. While Princeton University has consistently had ROTC represented at its career fairs, Columbia has had a period when, despite the requirement of the Solomon amendment, it has prevented ROTC from recruiting. The Solomon amendment has to be reinforced by the military, as career fairs are crucial in placing the military on the same level of significance as other employers.
This policy proposal is also fairly low cost, relying mostly on monitoring of access to equal recruitment opportunities. Once the program is expanded, the University administrations will incur further costs due to provision of transportation, office and classroom spaces. In the example of Princeton, these additional costs are likely to have been allotted for in the budget, as the quota that the Army ROTC faces on Princeton University campus is 15, but we have not yet reached it.69 Thus, there are no additional
funds that the Princeton ROTC programs will have to request. If other Ivy League schools have a similar quota, they also have not reached it, which means there are available previously allotted funds to cover for increasing costs.
Two of Ivy Leagues do not have Navy ROTC Detachments and 4 do not have Air Force ROTC. Some Ivy League schools are more likely to cooperate with ROTC than others, as evident by uneven distribution of the three branches across the Ivy Leagues. In line with the reasoning that the Ivy League education is beneficial to the future officers, Navy and Air Force should attempt to establish ROTC detachments in all Ivies to maximize the pool of high-quality candidates. This will involve commitment of time and resources in order to reach compromises with administrations of the schools that are least eager to expand ROTC presence. However, the benefits of expansion outlined earlier outweigh these costs.
The second important task that the ROTC in Ivy Leagues faces is integration. The most important issue of integration that the schools should focus on, is accreditation. Table 1 outlines the two approaches that some of the Ivy League universities have used: Cornell and Penn allow university credit for some of the courses, while Harvard and Yale offer courses that count towards some of the ROTC requirements. The rest of the Ivy Leagues does not offer either option, which limits the extent to which ROTC cadets participate in the academic lives of their respective Ivy League schools.
The practice of accreditation has to be formalized and expanded. At the moment, Ivy Leagues determine whether ROTC courses deserve credit using the same criteria as for other institutional courses.70 Reasons that the administration cites are: non-matching level of workload, overly simple subject matters and resemblance to vocational
training.71 Taking into account these criticisms, and keeping in mind the unique academic quality of the Ivy League faculty, Harvard-Yale model, where ROTC grants credit for some of the University courses, is more likely to be accepted by the Universities’ administrations.
This policy option has a low monetary cost, but it requires cooperation between the ROTC program administrators and the University, in order to formalize the transfer of credit and ensuring that the courses that fulfill the ROTC requirement are offered with sufficient regularity. However, the benefits of the policy outweigh the cost. Consistent inclusion of military education into the curriculum of the university will broaden the scope of intellectual inquiry that benefits the university as a whole. Larger student population will communicate with ROTC cadets in an academic setting, and keeping in mind the potential that the Ivy Leagues have for producing future civilian leaders, it will ameliorate the gap between civilian and military elites. ROTC cadets will get more courses within the high quality liberal education, educating them as citizens, at the time when they are become soldiers. The total product of accreditation is a reality where the military and the civilians have more mutual knowledge and respect, thus bridging the gap between them.
Joint programs between the ROTC programs and academic departments or other University organizations will foster social and informal links between cadets, professors and students. Princeton University Army ROTC has conducted training of athletic teams, joint summer program with the Department of History and a conference on sexual assault in collaboration with Sexual Harassment/Assault Advising, Resources & Education group.72 All three events address different aspects of civil-military relations. The joint exercise with an athletic team in leadership and teamwork has revealed the
similarities between the cadets and the sportsmen, as both groups value qualities that teamwork requires, such as trust, reliability, etc. Summer course in Normandy with the distinguished professor David Bell has provided the cadets and the students to share their views on the conduct of war and history, thus mutually enriching each others’ outlooks. Finally, ROTC’s participation in the conference on sexual assault communicates to the larger student body the commitment that the military has to combatting the problems related to sexual assault in the active duty.
Princeton ROTC experience shows the potential benefits that the collaboration between the ROTC and other University organizations. Similar programs should be offered in other Ivy Leagues. Furthermore, sharing of successful experiences between the Ivy League ROTC should be encouraged.
The task of reducing commute time to the facilities can be reduced by the utilization, as much as possible, of University facilities by the ROTC. If the policy of offering ROTC credit for some University courses is implemented, the courses that do not fit the University credit requirements, can still be taught on University premises, in order to minimize the amount of time the cadets spend traveling. Some commute will still have to take place, as construction of specialized training facilities, that will prevent other uses of the space, is too costly in some areas, where Ivy Leagues are located.
Conclusions
In this paper, I examined the presence of ROTC on Ivy League campuses as a means to bridge civil-military gap, in order to increase military effectiveness. Upon analysis, I concluded that the ROTC on Ivy Leagues educates citizen-soldiers, provides opportunities for interpersonal connections between the military and civilians, including future civilian elites. These effects of ROTC address the societal imperative that the
military faces, and thus aid the military effectiveness by easing the pressures that the society puts on its military.
Specific policies that I propose for the future of ROTC in Ivy Leagues fall under categories of expansion and integration. Expansion of the program will be targeted by inclusion of all branches of the military and changes in marketing techniques, including focus on civilian relevance of the military careers, expanded presence on career fairs, and emphasis of the affiliation between the ROTC and the particular Ivy League through a more pronounced and connected online presence. Discussed policies geared toward integration include offering ROTC credit for select University courses, expansion of practice of joint programs with academic departments and other University organizations, and introduction of training facilities to campuses. All policies discussed, with the exception of the last one, are relatively low-cost, high-benefit plans.
Recommended policies are geared to achieve greater presence on Ivy League campuses via reforms of marketing techniques, and better integration into the academic and social life, via communication in courses, joint programs or extracurricular activities. The resulting graduating pool will include military officers with knowledge and understanding of the civilian perspective, and civilian leaders who respect and know the military. The civil-military gap will become one step closer to closing, and the military’s societal objective will ease its pressure on the effectiveness of military operations.’