For more than 2,000 students, this weekend’s Commencement ceremony represents a monumental life achievement. While graduates and their families gear up for a huge celebration, it seems necessary to contemplate what the Ellipse would look like half empty on Commencement Day. As the death toll of U.S. soldiers in Iraq rapidly approaches 1,000 – nearly half the number of students graduating from GW this year – it is becoming obvious that, even to a cautious war supporter like me, the U.S. mission in Iraq is degenerating into a miserable failure.
Over the past year, the Bush administration has trumpeted a steady rotation of rationales in an attempt to justify its invasion of Iraq; as one fails, it moves on to another. While I too thought Saddam had weapons of mass destruction in the lead-up to the conflict, I simultaneously recognized that President Bush marched the country toward inevitable war regardless of geopolitics or other realities.
I am starting to wonder if I would have been more cautious in lending President Bush my support if I, or any member of my family or friends, could have been drafted to fight the war and win the peace. And while I have a hard time writing this as the son of anti-Vietnam War activists, decorated war veteran Rep. Charlie Rangel might be right; it might actually be time to explore bringing back the draft.
For many American citizens and politicians, going to war has transformed from a national sacrifice into an intellectual exercise. In the past going to war was a national effort. This no doubt was driven by the fact that the American people – knowing full well that they themselves, their sons or their neighbors had the potential to be conscripted – were incredibly careful in lending their support to a war effort. The Vietnam War changed this profoundly.
The Vietnam War was perpetrated by a government that lied to its citizens. It was fought by many young people who did not even have the right to vote and who were conscripted through a system which disproportionately exempted the rich and powerful from service. In the process of cleaning house after this catastrophe, the U.S. government eliminated the draft and created an entirely professional army.
While this approach has sharpened the efficacy of the U.S. Army as a fighting force, it has led to the deterioration of national unity and sacrifice during wartime. Instituting a draft would not only return this sense of national purpose behind future wars, but it would also decrease the likelihood that society would allow a trigger-happy administration with a family score to wantonly sign off on troop deployment.
To ensure that a Vietnam-type situation does not occur, any potential draft would have to be significantly different from its predecessor. First and foremost, politicians must not be given the ability to exempt themselves or their families. If politicians are not comfortable sending their own children to fight and die for their country, they should have no business sending other people’s children off to do so. Second, the draft would have to be used in conjunction with a professional army, rather than in place of one. Also, the draft must be amended to include women.
Discussing whether or not to bring back the draft is an emotional issue. The decision to send young people off to war should be the most gut-wrenching one for a president to make – one reserved for only the most extreme of circumstances. It is also a decision the American people must grapple with constantly. A national discussion on re-instituting the draft will ultimately lead to the realization that it is time the American government once again takes steps to foster a greater sense of sacrifice for one’s country through service to it.
-The writer, a junior majoring in international affairs, is Hatchet opinions editor.
