Huntington Differs With ROTC on Volunteer Force

An assistant Government professor and an ROTC spokesman disagreed last night on the feasibility of John Kenneth Galbraith's suggestion to alter the present structure of the Armed Forces.

In a letter to the Sunday New York Times, Galbraith had suggested that a paid volunteer force might replace the draft system. He felt that the draft was based on obsolete assumptions, chief of which was that a military power must be produced cheaply.

Samuel P. Huntington, assistant professor of Government and teacher of a course in Government and Defense, agreed with Galbraith that a volunteer force is possible. He was opposed to a policy of large armed force for "massive retaliation," but felt the U.S. should preserve its capability to fight limited and local wars.

The manpower for such a force, he felt, could be supplied from volunteers. "The reenlistment rates both for draftees and for men who have enlisted before, have gone up in recent years," he pointed out. With higher pay and greater fringe benefits, he said, a sufficient force probably could be raised.

The Army spokesman felt it was an oversimplification to say that our manpower requirements will be lessened with the advent of modern weapons. He expressed a doubt that a large enough volunteer force could be raised to meet our needs. "We have never demonstrated our ability to get a sufficient number of reenlistment," he said, "and with the continuance of peace and prosperity, I doubt that we will."