Final ROTC Resolution Released

Written by

The Senate has released its final resolution regarding military engagement, building off of last week’s draft resolution. It’s going to be presented to the University Senate at tomorrow’s plenary meeting–Bwog is waiting for word on whether or not it will be voted on.

The preambulatory clauses are phrased and ordered slightly differently, but the operative clauses are exactly the same. Those are below.


That Columbia University welcomes the opportunity to explore further mutually beneficial relationships with the Armed Forces of the United States, including participation in the programs of the Reserve Officers Training Corps; and


That Columbia University reaffirms University Statutes III § 35 (Powers of the Faculties Excepting Arts and Sciences and Health Sciences), XXIX § 293 (Powers of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences), and XXXIII § 333 (Powers of the Faculty of Health Sciences), that questions of academic credit, faculty appointments, academic governance, and space allocation shall remain the sole and exclusive domain of the Provost, of the faculties of the affected schools, and of their several deans, as shall not contravene the Charter of Columbia College (enacted 1787, amended 1810), the University Statutes, or any resolution of the Trustees or of the University Senate; and


That any further relationships with the Armed Forces of the United States, beginning with relationships that may arise as a result of this resolution, shall be subject to periodic review by the appropriate committees of the University Senate …

You can read the full text here.

Tags: , ,


  1. alum

    I doubt Columbia and the military would agree upon an ROTC program quickly enough, but it would be fitting for Columbia to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks with the University's own ROTC unit.

    • The military  

      has no interest in hosting a program out of Columbia. Notice how most metropolitan areas have consortium programs. Take a look at Washington DC. Despite the fact that there are active schools and active participants, members still participate in consortium. Though having classes on campus and being allowed to host PT on the respective students' campus causes each cadet to have less of a commute.

      As such, this resolution is a gesture towards increased mutually beneficial military engagement and the most profound it will most likely have is issues of recognition and academic credit for current and future Columbia students who participate in ROTC.

      • alum

        I don't believe the military has "no interest" in ROTC at Columbia. The Commander in Chief, the Secretary of Defense, and Joint Chiefs of Staff have expressed at least generalized interest. Navy Secretary Mabus's comments at Harvard could apply equally well to Columbia.

        Over-all ROTC access to NYC is poor: see by Sean Wilkes CC 06. The regional model that has placed ROTC on NYC's periphery is designed for rural and suburban regions, less for dense concentrated urban centers like NYC. The output of Fordham AROTC and Manhattan College AFROTC is shockingly low in proportion to the eligible NYC student population the programs purportedly serve.

        At present, Navy ROTC is the likeliest candidate for Columbia. Columbia NROTC would not be novel - Columbia already has a storied Naval (and Marines) officer tradition. Many alumni advocates are Columbia NROTC graduates. NROTC is currently inaccessible for Columbians. The student interest is there: the 2008 NROTC student survey arose from SEAS students protesting their lack of access to NROTC. Coupled with the practical justifications for Columbia NROTC, Secretary Mabus's comments at Harvard place the potential NROTC host candidacy of Columbia in a compelling light.

        Recently, an Army ROTC spokesman expressed an open mind and cautious interest for AROTC at Columbia, but my guess is Army would prefer to allow another service to test the waters at Columbia.

      • alum

        I think "no interest" is an overstatement. President Obama, Secretary Gates, and JCS Adm Mullen have expressed at least generalized interest. Navy Secretary Mabus's remarks at Harvard apply as well to Columbia. An Army ROTC spokesman recently expressed an open mind and cautious interest for a program at Columbia, but I believe Army prefers another service test the waters at Columbia first.

        Navy ROTC seems like the likeliest candidate for Columbia given Columbia's storied Navy (and Marines) tradition, the current absence of access for NROTC at Columbia, the expressed student interest in NROTC, and Navy Secretary Mabus's recent history at Harvard. It helps that many alumni ROTC advocates are Columbia NROTC graduates.

        Right now, NROTC is inaccessible for almost all NYC students, not just Columbians. Over-all ROTC access in NYC is poor. Fordham AROTC and Manhattan College AFROTC are located on the periphery of the city, which is excused by the prevailing regional ROTC model. However, that model is designed more for rural and suburban areas, less for a dense concentrated city like NYC. The output of FU AROTC and MC AFROTC is far too low for the eligible NYC student population the two programs purportedly serve.

        I think we will get an ROTC program at Columbia eventually, but getting that program by the 10th anniversary of 9/11 would be a feat. Stranger things have happened, though.

  2. This Columbia Student  

    thinks that decision is a complete joke. This University as embodied in the senate talks out of both sides of its mouth, by claiming one thing and then doing the other. I already had little respect for the bureaucracy, and this just furthers it. To assert that you uphold certain traditional values as an institution and then to re-neg on them in a single gesture of allowing an organisation back, who is representational of the lack of values and closed mindedness that institution does not value. Or does it? Screw this institution and the bs cool aid it feeds its students, they are unleashing animosity that will not go out shyly or quietly.

© 2006-2015 Blue and White Publishing Inc.