The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth (NNOMY) is a vital network that brings together national, regional, and local counter-recruitment and peace groups to resist the increasing influence of the military in young people’s lives. As it celebrates its 20th anniversary, let’s delve into its journey and impact.

NNOMY has been at the forefront of advocating for youth rights and challenging the Pentagon’s encroachment into schools and communities. Counter-recruitment came out of the anti-draft movement from the Vietnam war. (1) The U.S. war in Vietnam triggered the most tenacious anti-war movement in U.S. history, beginning with the start of the bombing of North Vietnam in 1964 and the introduction of combat troops the following year. Over the next decade, hundreds of thousands of young people become radicalized in a largely nonviolent, diverse and sometimes inchoate popular culture of war resistance, employing tactics ranging from comical street theatre to industrial sabotage. Students, government officials, labor unions, church groups and middle class families increasingly opposed the war as it climaxed in 1968, forcing a gradual withdrawal of U.S. forces. Anti-war activities, particularly large-scale resistance to military conscription, forced an end U.S. combat operations in Vietnam and a suspension of the draft by January 1973.(2)

The National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth (NNOMY) was founded in 2004 after the national counter-recruitment conference “Stopping War Where it Begins” in Philadelphia. It’s a network of peace organizations that opposes the militarization of schools and young people in the USA. Their mission is to stand up against the growing intrusion of the military in young people’s lives, particularly in disadvantaged communities where the Pentagon’s influence is felt most acutely. NNOMY plays a crucial role in advocating for youth empowerment and opposing involuntary JROTC placement in schools, which some argue may violate constitutional rights. If you’re passionate about these issues, NNOMY is a valuable resource for information and activism. (3)

July 8, 2024 / Edward Hasbrouck's blog - A new report released 18 June 2024 by the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) provides a remarkably candid window into the flawed and dangerous thinking of military strategists who support continual “readiness” for an on-demand military draft, even while they claim — perhaps truthfully — not to prefer a draft, even as Plan B, but only as Plan F for “Fallback” in case of prolonged total war. (Thanks to longtime anti-draft activist Eric Garris of Antiwar.com for bringing this report to my attention.)

The CNAS report is intended to show supporters of the current bipartisan mainstream U.S. foreign policy and military consensus why the U.S. should step up planning and preparation for a draft as a tool of deterrence. But for those outside that consensus who think current U.S. policy is already bellicose enough, especially those who assume that opposing draft registration and other steps toward readiness for a draft should be a low priority for antiwar activists because the U.S. will never again (or at least not soon) activate a draft, the CNAS report provides an important lesson in how preparedness for a draft is itself a tool of war, even in “peacetime”.

Friday, 14 June 2024 / Edward Hasbrouck / Edward Hasbrouck's blog - A proposal to expand registration for a possible military draft to young women as well as young men is moving forward again this year in Congress, along with a seductively simple-seeming but in practice unfeasible proposal to switch from the current system in which young men are required to register with the Selective Service System (SSS) to a system in which the SSS tries to identify and locate everyone eligible for a future draft and automatically register them based on other existing Federal databases from the Social Security Administration, IRS, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, etc.

Today both the U.S. Senate Armed Service Committee and the full U.S. House of Representatives approved different proposals to expand and/or make it harder to avoid the requirement for men ages 18-26 to register with the Selective Service System for a possible military draft.

The proposals for changes to Selective Service registration were approved during consideration of the Senate and House versions of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025, a “must-pass” annual bill that typically runs to more than a thousand pages.

The Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) approved a version of the NDAA that would expand Selective Service registration to include young women as well as young men. This version of the NDAA will now go to the floor as the starting point for consideration and approval by the full Senate.

Also today the full House of Representatives approved a different version of the NDAA that would make Selective Service registration automatic while keeping it for men only.

A House amendment proposed by Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), a West Point graduate and Army veteran, which would have replaced the provision to make draft registration automatic with a provision to repeal the Military Selective Service Act, was not “made in order” by the Rules Committee to be considered or voted on by the full House. There was no separate House floor vote on the proposed change to Selective Service registration, only a single vote on the entirety of the NDAA as a package.

The SASC markup was conducted in closed session, and only a summary of highlights of the version adopted by the SASC was released. It’s not clear whether the SASC version also includes the provision in the House version of the NDAA to try to make Selective Service registration ‘automatic’ or only the provision to expand the registration requirement (with which compliance is currently low) to young women as well as young men. A spokesperson for the SASC told The Hill today that the full text of the Senate version of the NDAA won’t be released until sometime in July.

  español

June 13, 2024  / Juliann Ventura and Julian Andreone / Washington Post - TEXARKANA, Tex. — Kyra Rousseau remembers feeling trapped in her high school esmedia center last fall when a phalanx of military personnel and faculty members shut the doors behind her and about 100 classmates before gathering everyone’s phones.

Rousseau, 18, was a senior here at Liberty-Eylau High School. The service members were recruiters. She recalled asking to leave but being told to sit down — that her graduation hinged on completion of a military aptitude test.

“They tricked us,” Rousseau said. “They said ‘ASVAB,’ but they didn’t say what the ASVAB was.”

It stands for the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery, a standardized test developed by the Defense Department decades ago to help the military funnel recruits into occupations that match their skills and intellect. And if Donald Trump’s last defense secretary could have his way, all public high school students would be required to take it.

June 5, 2024 / NNOMY office & Microsoft Copilot Ai - The following article is a Q & A conversation between the National Network Opposing the Militarization of Youth office and the Microsoft Copilot artificial intelligence program asking questions about the expanding practice`of involuntary placement of marginalized community youth into Junior Reserve Officer Training corps programs in their high schools without reasonable consent either by the legal guardians of or the students themselves. Some of the conclusions that the Ai program comes to are revealing in its programmed biases to maintain a balanced viewpoint.

NNOMY office: Why are U.S. school districts allowing their poorer high schools, nationally, to place youth into JROTC without consent by parents and students?

Microsoft Copilot:  The issue of Junior Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (JROTC) programs in schools is a complex one, and opinions vary. Here are some key points:

1. Local Decision-Making:
• The decision to allow JROTC programs often rests with individual school districts or even specific high schools.
• In Portland Public Schools (PPS), for instance, the board voted to allow high schools the option of adding JROTC programs, but it doesn’t automatically bring JROTCs into all schools. Each school can decide whether to implement it1.
• This local autonomy allows schools to tailor their educational offerings based on their unique circumstances.
2. Arguments Against JROTC:
• Critics argue that JROTC can disproportionately target students with limited options after high school.
• Some believe that military recruiters and JROTC representatives use these programs to indoctrinate students at a young age, potentially influencing their career choices.
• Opponents also highlight concerns about militarization within schools and the impact on students’ autonomy.
3. Arguments in Favor of JROTC:
• Supporters view JROTC as a positive resource for students who want or need it.
• Some veterans credit JROTC with providing structure, discipline, and opportunities they couldn’t find elsewhere.
• They emphasize that JROTC participation is voluntary and can offer valuable skills and experiences.
4. Historical Context:
• About 30 years ago, PPS banned military recruitment on campuses due to the now-overturned “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy affecting LGBTQ+ individuals in the military.
• Later, federal law overruled the district’s resolution, allowing recruiters back on campuses alongside anti-war activists1.

In summary, the decision to include JROTC programs in schools involves balancing various perspectives, including concerns about consent, military influence, and educational benefits1. Ultimately, it’s up to each community to weigh these factors and make informed choices.