At present, the committee appears ready torecommend some sort of break with ROTC but acomplete repudiation of the military program seemsunlikely.
Committee members say their recommendation maynot come down to a simple yes or no to ROTC.
"I think there clearly is a consensus in thatwe would like to preserve the ability of Harvardundergraduates to participate in the ROTC programif they wish to," says ROTC committee memberProfessor of Law Daniel J. Meltzer '72. "There isalso a consensus that we are very concerned" aboutthe military's discriminatory policy."
Meltzer says the committee may even "propose arange of possibilities for the FacultyCouncil...to consider."
In addition to Meltzer and Verba, four otherprofessors sit on the committee: Professor ofEnglish and Comparative Literature James Engell,Professor of Economics Claudia D. Goldin, PlummerProfessor of Christian Morals Peter J. Gomes andDillon Professor of International Affairs JosephS. Nye Jr.
The committee is exploring whether Harvardstudents could still take part in ROTC programs atother local schools if the University severs tieswith ROTC.
"I don't think there is any reason we shouldprevent Harvard students from participating inROTC" programs at other colleges if Harvard endsits affiliation with ROTC, says committee memberRoland L. Dunbrack '85.
Dunbrack, a Mather tutor and former chair of abisexual, gay and lesbian organization at theGraduate School of Arts and Sciences, says thecommittee has met with ROTC officials at MIT todiscuss the options.
The University terminated its ROTC program in1969 in the wake of antiwar protests, butestablished an off-campus ROTC program at MIT in1976.
According to Dunbrack, Harvard's current tiesto ROTC consists of a $132,000 annual payment toMIT to cover costs for Harvard studentscross-enrolled in its program. The University alsomaintains a written contract with the Navy ROTCprogram, which has more stringent rules forcross-registration.
The committee issued an interim report in Aprilwhich acknowledged "apparent inconsistencies"between Harvard's policy of non-discrimination andthe Pentagon's ban against gays. But the committeealso said it had reached "no conclusions" andeffectively voided the Faculty Council's ROTCultimatum by postponing concrete action until fall
The decision provoked little reaction amongstudents. Indeed, undergraduates have remainedrelatively indifferent to the ROTC debate thisyear.
Students packed Undergraduate Council meetingsin 1989 to fight--and defeat--a recommendation tobring ROTC back on campus. But forums on the issuethis year were poorly attended.
Even the Undergraduate Council failed to investa clear mandate in their ROTC proposal. Lacking asharp, refined debate, the council voted to sendthree different reports to the Faculty torepresent a spectrum of student opinion.
Nevertheless, McCormack and Aronberg insistthey are representing the majority ofundergraduates by fighting for the status quo. Inaddition to outmaneuvering Dunbrack and YaredBelai '92, they will have to whittle away at thevenerable consensus of professors on the committeeto keep Harvard's ROTC program in its presentform.