The Draft: Is It “Drafty” in Here? - Volume 21, Issue 21

By Andrew Pinkham

The Pentagon’s recent Congressional bills indicate the military draft may be reinstated sometime after the coming elections. Various emails and articles from the underground newspapers are circulating the internet, expressing outrage at a policy reminiscent of Vietnam-era turmoil.

Information networks claim that the Pentagon is slowly filling up draft board vacancies throughout the US, while the Pentagon and Selective Service System (SSS) websites quietly begin to campaign for citizens to “Serve Your Community and Nation.”

The SSS wants to hear from men and women in the community willing to serve as members of a local draft board. If a military draft becomes necessary, approximately 2,000 Local and Appeal Boards throughout America would decide which young men (who submit a claim) receive deferments, postponements or exemptions from military service, based on Federal guidelines.

Last used by the U.S. in 1973, the government abolished the draft toward the end of the Vietnam conflict, a war so unpopular that it tore America apart with demonstrations. While the draft was applied to men between the age of 18 and 26, and required U.S. citizens and residents to register within 30 days of their 18th birthday, current bills before Congress call for a few changes: Women would now be included in the draft, and no exemption would be allowed for college or graduate students.

During the Vietnam era students could claim exemptions, as Bill Clinton did, or those whose number was called could serve in the National Guard, as George Bush did. Under pending bills, college students would only be able to finish their current semester, while high school seniors could finish their year. In addition, a Canada-US treaty, established after 9/11, prevents citizens from traveling to Canada even if they felt unable to fight for religious or political reasons.

With low morale in Iraq and widespread criticism of the Pentagon’s recent actions, including duty extensions and reserve mobilizations, a new draft policy may exacerbate currently high political tensions - the actual draft would be proposed after the elections so as not to cause a political uproar, which it certainly would. Encouraging a draft would be catastrophic for George Bush in the coming elections, but some experts see few other options for Bush, if he were reelected [you mean, elected! --Liberal Ed] and chose to contiue the war on terrorism at home and in the Middle East.

U.S Representative and New York Democrat Charles Rangel, who proposed the bill the House of Representatives, stated that “the experts are all saying we’re going to have to beef up our presence in Iraq,” explaining that the only way to fill the nation’s military without exploiting poor families would be to use the draft. (Rangel opposed the war in Iraq; some argue that he thinks that a draft would compel citizens to oppose more wars since their sons and daughters would be called on to fight).

Charles Peña, Director of Defense Studies at the Libertarian Cato Institute, believes that he can change the Pentagon’s mind by using math: “The closest parallel to the Iraq situation is the British in Northern Ireland, where you also had some people supporting the occupying army and some opposing them, and where the opponents were willing to resort to terror tactics. There the British needed a ratio of 10 soldiers per 1,000 population to restore order, and at their height, it was 20 soldiers per 1,000 population. If you transfer that to Iraq, it would mean you’d need at least 240,000 troops and maybe as many as 480,000.” Additionally, it would take over half a year for the first recruits of the draft to be ready for war.

On the other hand, government officials have denied planning of a new draft. “There are no secret discussions,” said SSS spokesman Pat Schuback. While government officials are denying plans for a draft, Schubak later stated that “[the draft] is a plan on paper[...]We’re just an insurance policy. If we’re needed, we’re here; we’re ready,” implying that the idea had been obviously tossed around in the SSS. As articles circulayed the internet, the notice to “server” was removed from the web sites it was on.

Also contrary to Schuback’s word is the Universal National Service Act of 2003 (HR 163), introduced in the House to “provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes.” The related bill in the Senate, proposed by Senator Hollings, is S89.

A reinstated draft policy represents an alarming irony. Earlier this year Donald Rumsfeld and Richard Myers both stated that they opposed the idea of a draft and that they would rather have professionals - citizens who chose their jobs - in the field. Apparently, there are not enough of them.