Under the presidency of George W. Bush we can expect policy changes sure to rankle plenty of UCLA students and faculty. In the past, ROTC has served as target of protest for campus movements against actions such as the Vietnam War and the ban of open gays from military service. UCLA itself has a history of activism aimed at removing ROTC from campus. I'd like to point out, however, why even people with more liberal and anti-military attitudes should support ROTC.

The most common path to becoming a U.S. military officer is through ROTC - about 40% of new officers acquire their requisite bachelor's degree and initial military education through these programs. About half of ROTC graduates benefit from scholarships, which each year provide up to $16,000 tuition, as well as $450 a year for books and $150 a month stipend in exchange for a four-year commitment to the military after graduation.

There are at least four compelling reasons why ROTC should remain on campus:

• ROTC scholarships provide the opportunity for advanced education and upward mobility for many students who would otherwise be unable to finance a college degree.
• The student population of the military academies, an alternate route to the officer ranks, is fairly isolated from the civilian world and extremely homogenous - about two-thirds are white and male. ROTC programs on civilian campuses provide a more diverse pool for the higher ranks of the military establishment. Indeed, the majority of minority and/or women officers are acquired through ROTC programs such as the one at UCLA.
• ROTC exposes future officers to diverse populations, course selections and analytic perspectives, compared to the more conservative and technically focused environment at the academies.
• College students need to be aware of the presence and central role of the U.S. military, rather than be sheltered from exposure to it. If we permit the military to remain invisible to our future leaders, we create citizens who are less informed about an American institution with the power to inflict mass destruction anywhere around the globe. The ROTC presence on campus serves as an important reminder of the responsibility we have to stay informed of our military's function and activities.

Removing ROTC from campus is not a practical goal for the university to adopt, anyway. Land-grant colleges received land from the government with the condition that they offer some military instruction in addition to their regular curriculum. Any such college that votes to expel ROTC from its campus faces the risk of the government withdrawing all federal support to the institution. Given the recent shortage of military personnel and the proclivities of the new Republican leadership, this outcome is not only possible but likely.

I actually enjoy having ROTC students in my classes because they are usually among the top performers and most active participants. I also like the opportunity to interact with future military leaders; you never know what impact your course might have somewhere down the road.

Laura L. Miller is an assistant professor of sociology who teaches a course on the military and society and has done research on related issues.