honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Wednesday, November 7, 2001

Island Voices
What a new draft might be

By John Griffin
Former editor of The Advertiser's editorial pages

With President Bush warning of a long war against terrorism and its sponsoring nations, it's time to debate not just bringing back the military draft. Let's talk over something bigger and better: universal service for all men, and maybe women, too.

Yes, I know the Bush administration has said reviving the draft is not now on the table. Most military leaders like the professionalism of our all-volunteer forces. They correctly note this is a different kind of war, so far at least requiring fewer large battlefield forces and more small, skilled units.

And, like many others, I have bad memories of Vietnam. Then the draft sent too many of the poor and minorities off to fight while affluent whites got college deferments — or, like Bush who flew jets in Texas, found a haven in the National Guard. Ending the draft in 1973 helped get us out of the Vietnam quagmire. I backed that.

But that was then, and this is a different century with its own challenges.

We have some 1.4 million Americans in uniform on active duty, with authorization to call up more from the 900,000 members of the National Guard and Reserves.

That seems like a lot of military already. No doubt some will warn about a "Field of Bad Dreams" scenario, arguing that if we draft an even bigger military, our leaders will use it to enlarge the war. Again, a ghost of Vietnam.

But, even at best, any long twilight struggle with its bombings, covert unit action and sometimes-larger military flare-ups is going to take a toll. In addition, we have a new front called homeland defense that will require people.

While the country is now united in post-9/11 patriotism and resolve, I wonder: 1) whether those will fade with time and if and when American military casualties mount, and 2) whether enough young people will enlist in the long, unpleasant struggle.

Here I come to the desirability of a draft as an equalizer of service and sacrifice in our democratic and supposedly egalitarian society. Noting that's the way it worked in World War II and the Korean War, Charles Moskos, the much-quoted military sociologist at Northwestern University, says:

"What made conscription work before Vietnam was that America was drafting from the top of the social ladder. For any future draft to work, the elite youth will have to serve, too."

How ready is the standby draft system we have now, where young men must register at age 18? A statement from the Selective Service System:

"If a draft were held today, it would be dramatically different from the one held during the Vietnam War. A series of reforms during the latter part of the Vietnam conflict changed the way the draft operated to make it more fair and equitable."

Those reforms limit college deferments to a semester, set up more representative draft boards, and revamp the lottery that determines who actually serves. (See the Selective Service System Web site).

Unless we get into some major war with another nation, the pool of draftable men (not to mention women) will always be much larger than the number actually inducted. Virtually all might be eligible, but who goes would depend on the lottery draw. Think roulette in reverse.

Which brings us to proposals for universal national service — the idea of everyone being required to serve the country for a year or two with a small salary and perhaps with a bonus afterward of money for college or buying a home.

Some could opt for military service, maybe with extra pay if combat is involved. Others might choose Peace Corps service abroad, or one of its domestic counterparts, including teaching programs where appropriate.

Professor Moskos suggests jobs linked to homeland security, perhaps at airports with X-ray scanners or other devices. In today's troubled economy, maybe some modernized version of the pre-World War II Civilian Conservation Corps.

As one who benefited much by years in the military and work for the Peace Corps, I see possibilities for revamped definitions of public service. The process could lead new generations to better appreciate democracy's costs and benefits at a time when both are at issue.

So let the debate begin.