University should ban on-campus military recruitment

Letter to the Editor

We, the undersigned, write in protest of the continued presence of military recruiters on this university campus. As members of an educational institution dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge in a peaceful and safe environment, we submit that permitting representatives of the armed forces to recruit on-campus represents a tacit approval of their policies and actions.

This approval is in direct conflict with the University's Policy on General Rules of Conduct, specifically section C, which prohibits "Fighting ... or acting in any manner, which endangers the safety of oneself or others. This prohibition includes acts of violence as well as threats of violence," and section K, which forbids "Conducting oneself in any manner, which is offensive, abusive or contrary to common decency or morality; carrying out any form of harassment including sexual harassment."

These rules of conduct are essential to the establishment and protection of an environment conducive to academic excellence. Yet the presence of the armed forces, organizations that embody systematic violence and discrimination, threatens the integrity of the university community by violating these rules and belying the university's commitment to its own values.

We are aware that the Solomon Amendments, codified within Public Laws 104-208, Section 514, and104-206, Section 509, make military recruiters' access to campus a prerequisite for funding and grants from a variety of federal agencies, and that the absence of such funding would be problematic to a research institution such as UConn. Yet we are confident the university would not sell itself out willingly, and therefore contend that such coercion is deplorable.

Equally deplorable, however, is the university's continued silence on the issue.

By permitting the presence of representatives of the armed forces on campus, the university not only violates the General Rules of Conduct, but also the pledge contained within the Policy Statement on Affirmative Action and Equal Employment Opportunity that, "it is the University's policy to comply with all laws and regulations that prohibit employment discrimination." Permitting military recruitment on campus is in direct conflict with the State of Connecticut's Public Act 91-58, CGS §46a that, "Prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation in ... job recruitment and placement services provided by state agencies, educational and vocational programs of state agencies."

Recognizing these and similarly profound inconsistencies, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found in its November 29, 2004 ruling in the case Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights v. Donald Rumsfeld, that the Solomon Amendments violate academic institutions' First Amendment rights under the doctrine of expressive association. Though the Federal government has contested this decision, we urge UConn to follow the lead of the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and make good on its own promises of a learning environment free from violence and discrimination.

In addressing this issue, our university is faced with yet another opportunity to prove its excellence in academic and social affairs. By embracing the principles of equality and non-violence, UConn stands to gain in status as both a model institution dedicated to the pursuit of democratic ideals and as an organization unafraid to confront hypocrisies both internal and external.

We therefore urge the university to issue a statement condemning the coercive provisions of the Solomon Amendments. We strongly suggest the university issue a statement condemning the violent and discriminatory practices of the armed forces. We further request the university deeply consider denying representatives of the armed forces access to this campus pending resolution of the constitutionality of the Solomon Amendments within the federal court system.

-Gregory Bailey

And the members of StrikeOne