But the council's lively and admittedly uninformed debate during last Sunday's meeting paled in comparison to the argument which raged across campus later in the week--spurred on by pleas for support from students on both sides of the controversy.

Council members said that they were not aware of all the issues surrounding ROTC during the debate, but they can claim no such ignorance after a week of intensive demonstrations and lobbying activities.

ARAC's efforts have been most visible. They began the week with a candlelight vigil in front of the Kennedy School of Government planned to coincide with a speech by the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson. But inside, when asked about the ROTC controversy by students, Jackson said ROTC should remain an option for undergraduates.

On Tuesday, 300 students gathered in front of University Hall to hear students, faculty members, alumni and even a dean speak against ROTC's return to Harvard.

At that rally, Kelly M. Dermody '89-'90, co-chair of the Bisexual, Gay and Lesbian Students Association, demanded not only that the council repeal its resolution, but that it issue an apology to the gay and lesbian community for its action.

Rally participants sought to invoke the spirit of 1969 as Michael W. Macy '70, a participant in the University Hall takeover, urged students to wage their fight on the grounds of the fundamental incompatibility of the military with the University's academic mission.

But at the same time as ARAC members pointed to well-attended events and small but symbolic victories like Lee's about-face, ROTC advocates mobilized to wage a campaign of their own.

After the opening moments of the debate Sunday, ROTC supporters seemed to understand that to make their cause politically viable, they would have to make arguments other than an on-campus ROTC program's being convenient for students.

At the council meeting, ROTC students Joel D. Hornstein '92 and Scott Frewing '90--the resolution's co-sponsors--both argued that many students could not afford to come to Harvard without ROTC scholarships.

As the debate evolved, ROTC supporters began playing ARAC's own game and introduced their own issue of constitutionality: they argued that by disallowing ROTC's return, the council would be discriminating on the basis of economic disadvantage, a practice also forbidden by its constitution.

But later in the week, financial aid officers said that only Army ROTC, which accomodates 20 of the 90 Harvard students participating in the program, grants less money to students without on campus units.

The war of activism continued to rage as ARAC members Thursday staged a "lobby-in," dropping off approximately 30 letters to the council's offices in Canaday Hall.

And pro-ROTC students continued to poster the campus with signs like the one reading: "If you support more progressive thinking in the military, Harvard officers are part of the solution. Support ROTC on campus." Another read simply, "Tolerance for Everyone."

Pro-ROTC students also argued that training officers at Harvard will help to liberalize the military. By introducing Harvard students into the military, they might be able to reform the armed services from within, ROTC backers argued.

But many students and professors have said the entire debate over ROTC is irrelevant. The full Faculty must vote on any change in the University's current ROTC policies.