F

Seventy-Third Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
.. UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
Where Opinions Are e STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Trutb Will Prevail"#
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

CHINA-INDIA BORDER CONFLICT:
Himalayan Feud Has Serious Overtones

4

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1962

NIGHT EDITOR: RONALD WILTON


Incompetence Plagues
SGC Membership

STUDENT GOVERNMENT COUNCIL is
breeding its own destruction.
Although Council members vaguely sense
that 'something is wrong with SGC," they have
been incapable of defining its difficulties. Per-
haps the reason for this is that they are
looking in all the wrong places. SGC must
look at its own membership to find the solu-
tions to its most basic problems.
The general incompetence of the members
is perhaps the most obvious of SGC's weak-
nesses. Last year's election produced a fresh
crops of representatives whose knowledge of
the 'campus was appalling limited. And even
now; instead of making a conscientious effort
to inform' themselves about campus issues,
some of these members still lack the basic
information necessary to initiate or even con-
sider pertinent legislation.
Not only are some Council members ignorant
of basic campus facts, but they do not even
take the time to inform themselves of what
SGC will be debating on Wednesday nights.
FOR EXAMPLE, last semester, when Tom
Brown proposed a change in the Hare
system of election, it was evident that at least
a third of the body did not even understand
how SGC members get elected.
In addition, Panhellenic Association Presi-
dent Ann McMillan and Interfraternity Coun-
cll President John Meyerholz were quite slow
in comprehending changes that were recently
made in the functions of the Committee on
Membership in Student Organizations. If there
is one SGC committee of which these two ex-
officios should have comprehensive knowledge,
it is the membership committee. Obviously,
from the fact that they insisted upon a week's
postponement in order "to digest" the "sub-
tleties" of changes made at the table, Miss
McMillan and Meyerholz do not have adequate
knowledge
Inadequate preparation for meetings is also
evident when Council considers motions on
student opinions. Ideally, one SGC member sets
before the body his views on an issue relevant
to students. The other SGC members then
criticize and discuss this expression and explain
how their attitudes differ from the one ex-
pressed. The motion is laid aside for a week
so that it may be rewritten to encompass the
various views of all the members. Finally, at
the next meeting, the representatives simply
vote on the perfected motion.
However, this never really happens. Because
members do not come to meetings prepared,
meaningful discussion of the original motion
is impossible. Consequently, the legislation is
completely rewritten and voted upon at the
same meeting.
INCOMPETENCE is not the only failing of
SGC members. Such active representatives as
Robert Ross and Robert Finke are often dis-
illusioned about the effectiveness of SGC or
do not really think that SGC is a very impor-
tant organization. It is true that Ross envisions
SOC as a significant element in campus
politics, but so far he has been unable to
muster sufficient support to, realize this ideal.
The reality seems to be that Council exists
merely as an organization which can meekly
express student opinion.
Finke, on the other hand, never has thought
that SGC should play a large role in decision
making.
Such pessimistic views of Council's role on
campus obviously' hurt the organization. If
SGC is to function properly, then all its mem-
bers must be deeply committed to the idea
that students should have a considerable say
In the formulation of policies relevant to stu-
dents.
SGC is doubly damned because its president
also assigns it a limited role on campus. Al-
though Steven Stockmeyer is a highly respon-
sible president, he is hardly a dynamic leader,
simply because he is not committed to the con-
cept that students should be able to govern
themselves.
ANOTHER important weakness of SGC mem-
bers is that many of them are bitterly
opposed to each other. Members sometimes
vote against a proposal not so much because
they disagree with it, but because they have
a grudge against its supporters.
SGC members certainly have the right to
like and dislike whomever they want, but it

is most detrimental to the Council when its
members let personal prejudices prevent clear
thinking.
The fact that SGC has frozen itself into two
blocs, conservatives and liberals, has furthered
this antagonism between members. If used
properly, these two blocs could form a very
effective device in synthesizing the stands of
individual Council members before Wednesday
night meetings. However, the division of Coun-
cil into two blocs has not simplified proce-
dure. It has only bred more contempt, an-
tagonism and bitterness between Council mem-
bers. This, in turn, has helped to close the
minds of SGC members and made impossible
any meaningful discussion between the two
camps.
A GENERAL ANALYSIS of the contributinns

FRED BATLLE-He does not have a clear
understanding of the issues facing SGC and
often refuses to change his opinions, once
formed. He sometimes becomes so confused
that he mistakenly votes for the wrong side.
THOMAS BROWN-Although he has worked
hard in his position as treasurer and has
administrative ability, his debate at the table
shows a reluctance to change his opinions,
once formed, and also shows his inability to
express his ideas easily.
ROBERT FINKE, Michigan Union-Were it
not for his very limited view of the role of
SGC, he would be an excellent Council mem-
ber. He is the floor leader of the conservatives
and provides the reasonable arguments to
counter the liberals.
ROBERT GEARY, Interquadrangle Council
-He does not appear interested in SGC and
seems to attend meetings only because his role
as IQC president requires it. He has initiated
no legislation and rarely participates in debate.
RICHARD G'SELL-He is an inept execu-
tive vice-president who is not able to function
adequately as assistant to the president. He
knows little about the campus, which is par-
ticularly inexcusable since he is now in his
second elective term.-
SHARON JEFFREY-She has never been an
active participant in debate but at one time did
more work behind the scenes than she does
now. She probably knows more about the
campus than is evident, but unfortunately does
not demonstrate this at meetings.
ANN McMILLAN, Panhellenic Association-
She thinks that women should not be on Coun-
cil and perhaps this explains why she has never
introduced a motion or an amendement and
rarely participates in discussion. Miss McMil-
lan's main function has been carried out apart
from the Council table. She has made an
effort to improve communications between
sororities and SGC and to keep sororities in-
formed on Council actions.
JOHN MEYERHOLZ, Interfraternity Coun-
cil-Although he has been alittle more active
on Council in the past few weeks, he has not
yet made an important contribution to debate.
His knowledge of the campus is limited to
knowledge of the fraternity system.
KENNETH MILLER-He was once more
active than he is now, probably because he is
losing faith in Council as a rational organiza-
tion and a means of maximizing student power.
Although he has not introduced much legisla-
tion, his debate and voting record shows that
he has kept an open mind and can be in-
fluenced by carefully reasoned debate.
MARY BETH NORTON, Assembly President
-She is the most active and interested woman
on SGC. However, her role on Council this
semester has been disappointingly small after
her significant contributions to the National
Student Association congress this summer.
MICHAEL OLINICK, The Daily-Considering
his knowledge of the campus, he does not de-
bate enough at meetings. However, he has
introduced a great deal of legislation and has
offered a number of amendments. When he
participates in discussion, his comments are
perceptive.
ROBERT ROSS-He is the spokesman of the
liberal bloc, and in this capacity he gives
Council some direction. Although his con-
tributions to SGC are many, it seems that he
sometimes doubts that Council in its present
status will become a stronger institution and,
perhaps for this reason, his legislative con-
tributions have decreased. The role of liberal
spokesman is disillusioning when one is con-
sistently shot down by one vote-the eight to
seven conservative margin.
MARGARET SKILES, Women's League-She
is a confused Council member who woud prob-
ably like to vote along with the liberal bloc but
is afraid that she will not be considered an
independent voter.
STEVEN STOCKMEYER-As SGC president,
he usually keeps discussion moving at a rapid
pace. But he does not provide dynamic leader-
ship and is not fully committed to the idea
that students can and should govern them-
selves.
IT IS CLEAR then, many Council members
are not coming close to fulfilling their roles
as student representatives. However, it is hoped
that the coming election will provide the high
quality members that SGC so desparately needs
to become an effective, dynamic and powerful

student organization.
Above all, SGC needs more members who
are committed to the idea of a strong student
government and who have faith that, with
hard work, Council can become an equal par-
ticipant in the formation of policy concerning
students' extra-classroom life.
Now that the question of SGC's sovereignty
over student organizations is under fire and
stagnation has set in around Council's right
to hold hearings about the sororities that have
not submitted adequate membership selection
practice statements, Council is without a dom-
inant issue. Council members would be pleased
to have an issue like the Reed Report handed
to them on a silver platter; however the func-
tion of legislators is to initiate policy, not just

By H. NEIL BERKSON
ANOTHER STICK of dynamite
has fallen into the tinderbox
tenuously balancing the world. And
although President Kennedy has
forcibly focused attention on the
Cuban threat through his strong
speech last night, although the
dangerous Berlin question remains
unanswered, let no one doubt the
nightmarish potential of the In-
dia-China border war.
Over the weekend 20,000 Red
Chinese troops took positions at
various points three to five miles
inside the Indian border across
the Himalayas. The fighting was
heavy. Chinese news media filed
"war dispatches"; Indian sources
also used the word war for the
first time.
Though reliable information is
still sketchy, indications are that
strong Chinese forces will continue
to press forward for strategic mil-
itary positions against the retreat-
ing Indian armies. While the pro-
hibitive Himalayan winter is less
than two weeks away, whether or
not it will bring a halt to the
fighting depends on the nature of
Red Chinese motives.
A clue to these motives may be
in the tone of the reports filed by
Hsinhua, the official Chinese
Communist news agency. In urgent
messages Hsinhua claimed that
India launched "all-out attacks"
on Chinese positions and that
China is merely defending herself.
Such words are strongly reminis-
cent of the language Adolph Hitler
used to stir up war fever in Ger-
many.
** *
THE CENTER of controversy
lies in the validity of the Mc-
Mahon Line which ostensibly di-
vides India and Tibet. India rec-
ognizes the border; Communist
China does not. Peiping, as a
matter of fact, claims 40,000
square miles of Indian territory.
Historically, both countries hold
questionable positions.
The McMahon Line dates back
to 1914 when India was part of
the British Empire. British dip-
lomat Sir Arthur Henry McMahon
presided over a Sino-Indian con-
ference which established the In-
dian-Tibetan frontier.
The catch is that no Chinese
government has ever recognized
the line. The Communists are only
following the example of the na-
tionalists and imperialists before
them when they claim that their
country never ratified the results
of the 1914 consultations.
* * *
EARLY in the last decade Red
Chinese maps were suddenly re-
drawn to include nearly 22,000
square miles south of the Mc-
Mahon Line in India's Northeast
Frontier Agency. They also claim-
ed parts of traditionally Indian
Ladakh and Kashmir provinces.
Through the 1950's Communist
troops nibbled away at the areas
they had declared their own. Prime
Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's gov-
ernment sent repeated diplomatic
protests, while continually reas-
serting its faith in China's good
intentions. F
In September, 1959, the situa-
tion took on a new sense of ur-
gency. Chinese troops moved into
two new areas-Bhutan and Sik-
kim, independent states voluntarily
protected by India. Two notes
from Chinese Premier Chou En-
lai to Nehru indicated for the first
time the exact nature of the
Chinese claims.
*« *
ON SEPTEMBER 12 Nehru re-
ported to the Indian Parliament
that "this Chinese claim which
was vaguely set down in maps,"
was now "definitely stated . . .
and much more serious" than the
border raids had originally in-
dicated. He said the Chinese de-
mands were "quite impossible for
India ever to accept, whatever the
consequences . . There is no
question of mediation, conciliation
or arbitration about that."
From this point the Indian at-

titude toward Communist China
stiffened considerably. The next
year India increased its defense
spending by nearly $60 millioin and
began reinforcing the border
areas.
Indian and Chinese troops
clashed sporadically as the situa-
tion kept deteriorating. Nehru and
his top aide, Defense Minister V.

Koshgor S I N K I A N G A nsi
Chip Chop Valley C
KASHMIR
 LADAKHCHIN
L ahor
CKHrTIBET -
Bara Hoti Heavy Fighting
DELHIaBHUTAN
" o A 4SIKKIM !
Jaipur
A"h INDIA NORM
Aliahabad FS FR ONT
Indore. PAKISTAN
INDIA 1
CALCUTTA ' ..'Mandalay
OMBAY Nagpur Bay Of BURMA
Bengal

300
itES
Lanchow
IA
(EA ST
' tR

when the Peiping regime is up for
membership in the UN, but that
is secondary. These aggressions
cannot be justified in Asia-that is
secondary. They can only widen
China's rift with Russia (the
USSR is currently supplying In-
dia with MIGs) -that, too, is
secondary.
* * *
IF CHINA is serious, and there
is yet no reason to think dif-
ferently, this is a war of limitless
proportions. The Communists want
to fight; India is committed to
respond. Nehru has officially or-
dered his armies to fight until all
Chinese troops are off Indian soil.
He cannot back down. Indian pub-
lic opinion-possibly still thinking
of Goa-is strongly militant.
Though no one is saying it, if
India finds itself on the verge
of defeat, America will have to
step in.
The stakes-all of Asia-are too
big for us to let the Communists
get away with murder. Would
Russia sit back? Would she find
herself inexorably alongside
China? Would she go against
China? Would be in World War
III?
THE LITTLE BATTLE going on
so many thousand miles away is
very frightening. It is totally un-
like any other cold war trouble-
spot.
In Cuba and Berlin the United
States and Russia hold all the
strings. As long as neither power
is able to risk war those situations
will remain within the bounds of
sanity.
But no country-Russia includ-
ed-can restrain the \uncontrol-
lable Chinese. Red China has 700
million people and has no qualms
about losing even 200 or 300 mil-
lion of them in conquest. Who can
deal rationally with a country
which has no fear of war, indeed,
which exults in war?
"Let China sleep," Napoleon I
said long ago, "when she awakens
the world will be sorry."

A

i

I

MAJOR FIGHTING-Chinese troops have made serious incursions into India at six major points
from the Chip Chap Valley in the west to the Northeast Frontier area. Heaviest fighting Is along
the MmMahon Line dividing India from Tibet. Other Chinese objectives appear to be the semi-
autonomous states of Kashmir, Bhutan and Sikkim. Chinese tanks and mobile truck fleets are
eating up territory in spite of heavy Indian resistance.

K. Krishna Menon, conferred sflv-
eral times with Chou and other
Communist officials but found no
common ground for discussion.
Over the past twelve months-.
up to the most recent outbreak
last weekend-the fighting has
grown gradually more intense, as
have the charges and counter-
charges. Each side has vociferously
labelled the other an aggressor.
Last December the Communists
openly threatened invasion, and
India swore to "resist and repel"
any such occurrence. With each
Communist affront-vocal and
physical-the once-pacifist sub-
continent has grown more rigid.
* * *
IN MARCH Communist China
appealed to India for negotiations,
and in his strongest power play
yet, Nehru declared that "peaceful
withdrawal of Chinese forces from
territories which have traditionally
been a part of India" was neces-
sary before any negotiations could
begin. Obviously, China does not
intend to withdraw. The implica-
tions of her policy are many and
serious.
The question is, why has Red
China chosen this time and this
issue as a test of strength. Several
answers are readily apparent.
The most obvious stems from
Red China's internal problems.
Her people are economically mis-
erable, there has been much
grumbling against the regime, and
the creation of an external threat
has become standard Communist
practice to quiet noises from with-
in.
Besides this political motive, Red
China has a definite military ob-
jective. Control of the Himalayas
would put her in an invulnerable
position vis-a-vis India. From the
Himalayas Chinese armies could
sweep south with relative ease.
* * *
BUT THE MOST interesting
theory about China's motives has
come out of Washington and is
economic in nature. The under-
developed world has closely watch-
ed the economic growth rates of
India and China to see which sys-
tem-strictly controlled Commun-
ism or modified Socialism-offers
them their best chance for future
development.
China has found herself on the
short end of this race for the last
few years, but involving India in
war may be one way to catch up.
India has concentrated on
building the consumer sector of
its economy; heavy indistry, and
resultant military power, have
long dominated China's list of
priorities.. {
Consequently, the cost of this
war to China will be slight while
India must reorient its entire
economy towards defense spend-
ing. At present, for instance, China
has 3 million men in uniform;
India has 500,000.

No one can know exactly how
large a force China will eventually
deploy, and the geographic nature
of the Himalayas detracts from
the importance of sheer numbers,
but India must prepare for the
worst. Again, this means drastic
shifts from consumption to mili-
tary goods.
* * *
CERTAIN EXPERTS have
theorized that this war will re-
main within bounds because both
sides have limited objectives. They.

are counting on India's devotion to
peace. To a great extent they are
counting on the United States and
Russia to calm things down. But
they are totally ignoring Red
China's insatiable ambitions.
Chinese diplomacy has never
recognized any middle ground.
Time and again Mao Tse-tung has
expounded the virtues of war. War
is the instrument of Chinese for-
eign policy.
The latest border aggressions
have occurred at the very time

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Notes Bias in UN University

To the Editor:
YOUR RECENT series of three
articles on a United Nations
University is unfortunately based
on wrong premises. The author of
the articles states that the aim of
such a university should be the
study of "problems of economic
and social development ... in the
broadest possible manner" and
claims that the present national
universities are unsuited for this
job because "a major purpose of
modern national education is the
presentation of national culture
and politicaldheritage in such a
way as to educate supporters of
that heritage.".
I completely agree with the stat-
ed purpose of such a university.
However, it seems to have escap-
ed the author that there exist a
few basic prerequisites for an un-
biased study of social problems in
the broadest manner. These are a
society in which free inquiry is
possible, where books can be pub-
lished criticizing presently held
beliefs and suggesting alternative
methods to those employed in the
past and where citizens holding
unorthodox beliefs are not subject
to arbitrary arrest by the police.
There is probably no single
country in the world today which
completely satisfies all of these
conditions.
THE QUESTION must now be
raised whether a United Nations
University as described in the
above mentioned articles can pro-
vide the necessary conditions for
an unbiased study of social and
economic problems. The answer to
this question is negative. Any au-
thoritarian government or police
state would of course employ all
means at its disposal to prevent
a frank study of-its system and
methods. The more powerful such
a country, the more influence it
has in the agencies of the UN,'
In addition it should be point-
ed out that the author's state-

ments concerning the onesidedness
and conservatism of national uni-
versities are a completely unwar-
ranted generalization. While this
may be the case in some countries
(for example the Soviet Union and
particularly Germany), it is not
true in many other nations.
The United States, for example,
belongs to the latter ones. In this
country the universities have a
long tradition in favor of experi-
mentation and innovation. In the
1930's the Roosevelt administra-
tion relied to. a large extent on
university professors for new ideas
in its program of social and eco-
nomic change.
* * *
OF COURSE there are elements
who resent this particular role of
the universities and who try their
best to restrict ;academic freedom.
But freedom is never to be taken
for granted. It requires a never
ending vigilance and fight lest it
be lost.
In conclusion it must be said
that a United Nations University
does not even begin to satisfy the
basic requirements which are nec-
essary for an unbiased study of
all systems. The best hopes lies
in the universities of those coun-
tries in which there is a mini-
mum of political interference with
universities and where research
and study can be carried out free
from intimidation.r
-Ernest G. Fontheim
Space Physics Research
Laboratory
'Freedom For'...
To the Editor:
MISS BRAHMS' editorial, "Cath-
olic Church Endangers Free
Thought, Creativity," led me to re-
call Eric Fromm's opinion that
through the centuries Western
Man had fought to rid himself of
restraint and in the process had
lost sight of his goals. He has
"Freedom From" but not "Free-
dom For." Failure to make such a

distinction in discussion of free-
dom often results in confusion,
The Catholic Church.perceives
its role as shepherd of its faith-
ful. In execution of this role it
must both show goals and warn its
faithful of harmful detours. Want-
ing either of these functions,'. the
Church would be remiss. The In-
dex of Forbidden Books serves as
one of these monitors, and is per-
fectly congruous in this role.
At best the Index is antique to-
day,, but not for the reasons stat-
ed in the editorial. The Index
was addressed to a semi-literate
population whose understanding of
human and world phenomena en-
compassed few contacts in a close-
ly circumscribed environ-
ment. Such a population could
hardly be expected to understand
a "foreign" idea. The Church in
medieval times had little choice
but to invent this sort of restraint
-not to inhibit but rather to pro-
tect. With a rise in the educational
level of the population, together
with a broadening of world
knowledge, such restraint becomes
less and less necessary.
SUCH an interpretation does not
require consideration of freedom
in the sense expressed in the edi-
torial, however. The Church
asserts that freedom is always ex-
pressed in a context. Freedom
exists only in cases where some-
thing is given up, for choice be=
tween alternatives characterizes
freedom. Choice implies some cri-
terion on which the choice is made.
In this sense acquiescence to the
Index is in essence an expression
of a Catholic's "freedom."
Miss Brahms worries over "Free-
dom From," but this is meaning-
less without a "Freedom For." A
creative mind devoid of context
ably characterizes solipsism, but
hardly intellectualism. Should we
best redirect our search for free-
dom?
-C. Michael Lamphier,
Sociology Department

I

- i..

FEIFFEII

SOVlET
BASES lp.
AI.CA.

AO E~ WIL
AX U-6.O~
f6URC551A
K--A1WI A

FOR ONCE tOHL(
WtMT AX IN1 f o
po UWrYsF~65 W~
AcH a , pt.AC6
r

I AMC WqOQ
If t5A CL E9~
1V6A.IEOUR660I5,
M't cteek.
yol) rFiR.S1

'fl lAStf FOR 196
VII=T' JAM bO' W70
TItJeIsC1AlJCM
T 'H C As/
t

JJOiA PAYO
CplJ PCHI r
MWJHL
caa~sr.

i

Pf1 (OHA' OF 146
7H6 50vtelr tWIN
Cup,~~IJ T
TO URE~C0l
"Ek-w t~/
(4TBX
10 IN A6

DE~ AR 4A5E P
LOOK AT 'iOUR W."'
rq? l. j CAS1UlJO p i
,McM- AMP WE Witt~
i ourotFcgA-6
U.. A66&551io4
VIPrAl)1 -

003~ PA5 VCU.S. YEA(I, WA1AOTw
NJO RECOF HUNGARY, FWtA?'
1IRAN4, 10 p Hxgc

IAH1 W6 WUL~l-I
A' U.S.-
AC~A O~T A

1ALAWY! 0'6
AM-691CA l

i