THE RISING EAST
Specter of war brings draft question to the forefront
By Richard Halloran
The prospect of a war on two fronts against North Korea and Iraq, in addition to the battle against terror and the new campaign for homeland security, has sparked calls for a resumption of the military draft.
Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., introduced a bill last week that would revive conscription, which has been dormant since 1973.
Rangel asserted that President Bush's war plans would require sacrifices "and those sacrifices need to be shared."
Rangel was supported by Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich. Both men are black, and Conyers contended that black Americans would bear the brunt of the fighting, while middle-class whites would mostly escape hazardous duty.
If the Rangel proposal goes forward, it is certain to stir enormous controversy as memories of the corrupted draft of the Vietnam era cannot be ignored. Then, with 26.8 million men of military age, 10.8 million served through enlistment or the draft. Nearly 16 million escaped, mostly through a lottery, hardship, physical or mental defects, or student deferments. Of these, 570,000 were draft offenders.
Associated Press
President Bush, his senior political advisers and the nation's military leaders have come out against the draft. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told reporters last week: "There is no need for it at all. The disadvantages of using compulsion to bring into the armed forces the men and women needed are notable."
A soldier of the U.S. Army 94th Engineer Combat Battalion checks to ensure that Army trucks are securely loaded on a train at the Rose Barracks in Germany for shipment to the Gulf region. Possible conflict on two fronts has prompted some to call for a resumption of the draft.
Pentagon officials said blacks made up 25 percent of the military people deployed to the Persian Gulf in 1991. Blacks who died in combat or noncombat situations represented 15 percent of the casualties. Whites, who made up 66 percent of U.S. forces there, accounted for 78 percent of the deaths. Hispanics, who were 5 percent of the forces, accounted for 4 percent of the deaths, and Asian Americans, less than 2 percent of the force, made up less than 1 percent of the deaths.
Today, advocates of the draft overlook this: Conscription is inherently unfair unless all able-bodied men are drafted, no matter how they are selected.
If one young man goes on winter maneuvers in Alaska and trains in the California desert in the summer, while another young man goes to college and fraternity parties, the system is unfair. It makes no difference how the draftee was chosen: by lottery, at random or by birth date. (Women are not legally subject to the draft.)
In that case, say those who are pushing for the draft, all young men of military age should be drafted, and those who don't serve in the armed forces should join the Peace Corps or perform a wide variety of community services.
Such compulsory service conflicts with the 13th Amendment to the Constitution, which prohibits "involuntary servitude." The Constitution authorizes Congress "to raise and support armies" but not to compel other service. The 13th Amendment was adopted at the end of the Civil War to preclude a return to slavery.
Proponents of the draft overlook other arguments against it. Some argue that U.S. military forces are stretched thin and have too many assignments.
That may be true. In the 1991 Gulf War, the United States had 2 million men and women in the armed forces. Today, there are 1.4 million, or one-third less, to cope with greater responsibilities.
Reviving the draft would not resolve that shortcoming. If the nation wants or needs a larger military force, Congress should authorize it and restore the draft only if not enough volunteers step forward.
Moreover, reviving the draft would not provide soldiers for hostilities with North Korea and Iraq because it would take a year to induct, equip, train and ship the new soldiers overseas. It is the Reserves and National Guard that must pick up the slack.
Proposals like that of Rangel and Conyers come perilously close to arguing for a race-based military. Unless all young men are to be drafted, racial quotas would be set for whites, blacks, Hispanics and others in proportion to their ratio in the U.S. population. Surely most Americans would reject that assault on civil rights.
Advocates of the draft contend that young men should be compelled to serve in the armed forces to teach them patriotism and their civil obligations.
But that is the realm of parents, schools and perhaps religious organizations, not drill sergeants on rifle ranges.
Richard Halloran formerly was a New York Times correspondent in Asia and Washington. Reach him at oranhall@hawaii.rr.com.
