March/April 2004 The Draft Ahead? by Murray Polner Irony of ironies, longtime liberal, antiwar congressmen, and various antiwar columnists, are leading the charge to revive the draft.
Democrats such as Rep. Charles Rangel believe that if our young—males and females eighteen to twenty-six, with no exemptions for college students or conscientious objectors—were forced to serve in the military, there would less willingness to go war. Yet a draft was in effect before the Korean and Vietnam wars and never deterred Washington from military involvement. The more potential cannon fodder is conscripted, the more savage is the war. Conscription, General Robert Scales, Jr., (ret.) onetime commander of the Army War College, recently wrote in Time, “…is a very bad idea whose time passed with the world wars, Korea, and Vietnam. These wars were tragically wasteful because in large measure they were fought with drafted soldiers” who were killed in combat in far greater numbers than better-trained regulars. Another reason why Rangel and his liberal allies have endorsed a draft is that they argue it would make the military more racially equal. But in fact today’s military is more racially and ethnically integrated than any other American institution, and more black officers and NCOs are giving orders to white troops than ever before. African-Americans (but not Latinos) are slightly overrepresented in the armed forces and in the officer corps, and overall the army is basically middle class, as proven by troops’ educational levels and social backgrounds—though popular distortions claim otherwise. In its year-end 2003 issue, the unofficial but authoritative Army Times published photos of 471 of the 506 American soldiers who died in Iraq and Afghanistan. The dead, noted the newspaper, “represent[s] the full, rich face of American diversity…. They came from all walks of life, from every race and creed.” Lack of opportunity in civilian life certainly causes many members of minorities to enlist—and others too, including large numbers of whites–but a draft will never alleviate the barriers they faced as civilians that led them to the recruiting station. Trial balloons urging a draft have been floated for the past few years, and more so since the murderous war in Iraq. American forces are now posted in more than 150 countries and there are genuine fears that the Bush administration’s post-9/11 adoption of preemptive war and expansionism will inevitably lead to a manpower shortage requiring a draft. Many experts, however, remain ambiguous. Ned Lebow, a perceptive military manpower specialist who teaches at Dartmouth College (quoted in Dave Lindorff’s thoughtful piece in Salon) believes “The Government is in a box.” Overextended reservists and National Guard troops, the deep difficulties of “Iraqization,” the reluctance of other nations to send in reinforcements, and the enormous budget deficit, lead Lebow to conclude, “So, that leaves the draft.” With, however, Lebow’s caveat: A draft “could be lethal for Bush or any other top official who proposed it.” He adds, “It’s hard to imagine Congress passing such a bill, but then, look how many members of Congress just rolled over and played dead on the bill for $87 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan.” Many pro-draft neocons are doubtless waiting for the coming post-election period, when another effort will surely be made to reintroduce conscription. More than likely they are only awaiting a green light from the White House, while for now letting Rangel and his fellow liberals lead the way and take the heat. For too many “conservatives” another draft means recapturing the mythical ethos of WWII and the pre-Sixties period. In that imaginary Eden, there was no racial or religious conflict, women knew their place, support for tyrants abroad was justified in the name of fighting Communism and young men called to the colors went willingly and patriotically to proudly serve their God and Country. And many liberals, especially non-vets, think they missed something by not serving in the military. Yet are they now prepared to send their children into the service? I doubt it. Four million Americans turn eighteen every year. Should the current lottery system be continued, how could a draft of, say, 50,000 be justified when all the rest are free to go about their civilian lives? Remember this: no congressional son was drafted during Vietnam, and today only one congressional son or daughter is an enlisted soldier. The notion of conscription may tempt Washington’s living room hawks to invade other “evil” nations, but the same favoritism and deference to influence and wealth will certainly prevail in a future draft. Anyone with political contacts and family connections will always be able to avoid active military duty, or if not, to receive plum jobs. I don’t know if there will be another draft, though I sometimes fear there will. If you listen to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the Pentagon, the answer as of now is emphatically “no.” One may or may not believe them, but time and again, Rumsfeld has said that he is fervently opposed to a revival of conscription. A draft, he and the Pentagon recognize, would mean short stints for distrustful and reluctant draftees without the technical skills or dedication needed in postmodern warfare. And, of course, another draft raises the distinct threat of mass discontent and opposition at home for wars fought for very dubious reasons. But do we need another draft and body bags to raise another antiwar movement? You may or may not respect the man and his views, but I believe Donald Rumsfeld is correct in opposing the draft, while Rangel and his allies are dead wrong in playing their dangerous game. What they ought to be doing is publicly battling the radicalism of our empire builders and helping instead to develop a sane, alternative foreign policy that encourages peaceful relations with friends abroad and at the same time courts potential rivals. Since World War I the world has experienced continuous bloodletting, almost always enhanced by conscription. We Americans rightly despise the draft because it tramples on our freedom. That fundamental value should never be sacrificed for ideological pipedreams and political manipulation. Another draft is a terrible idea in a very troubled time. Murray Polner co-chairs (with Stefan Merken) the Jewish Peace Fellowship. An army veteran, he wrote No Victory Parades: The Return of the Vietnam Veteran. [SIDEBAR]
©2004 Fellowship of Reconciliation |