Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue


Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 01, 1977 - Image 4

Resource type:
Michigan Daily, 1977-10-01

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.


4-Saturday, October 1, 1977-The Michigan Daily



rn tIQ

Flagellating someone else

Eighty-Eight Years of Editorial Freedom,


420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Vol. LXXXVIII, No. 21

News Phone: 764-0552

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
The neutron bomb: Trying
to justify nuClear warfare I
HE ISSUE of the neutron bomb, concept of disarmament.,
T when it first arose, produced a In Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman's wor-
sense of relief in many across the coun- ds, "The argument isn't whether this is
try. The reason: President Carter better or worse than what we have, but
brought it into the public forum right why we are recommitting ourselves to
on the heels of his decision not to ap- a policy of nuclear holocaust."
prove production of the B-i bomber. Perhaps President Carter is weav-
Any bomb, it seemed, would be better ing a strategy of disarmament in
tfian the B-1. For several euphoric which the neutron bomb is only a
weeks early last summer, it appeared negotiable thread. Since it now seems
that Carter had already begun to work certain to be produced, we hope this is
for his inaugural address commit- the case.
nm-nt: "Our ultimate goal - the elim-
intion of all nuclear weapons from .5...":::... ..........
this Earth."
Then he asked for money for the neu- 'Since the atomic bomb was
tron bomb, a nuclear weapon without dropped on Hiroshima, the use
nmch blast potential - meaning it of nuclear weapons has been re-I
doesn t destroy much property - but arded as a last resort. The neu-
with extremely lethal radiation - g. ,
meaning it kills people as well as a tron bomb changes all this.'
coiventional bomb. -Rep. Ted Weiss
The Senate approved it in July. The
House approved it Thursday. A joint +:-+ ::::::::::......:::: : :::::.:
conference will iron out the differ-
eices, then pass the appropriation to But such a bomb really has no place
tle White House for signing. in the U.S. arsenal. The plausible ar-
4 It is a very tricky issue. Supporters gument for our giant warheads - vul-j
ofthe bomb say it is purely a defensive nerable as the argument is - is that
weapon. It would be stationed in front the bombs are so gruesome that the
of European cities to guard against U.S. and the Soviet Union would never
Sqviet invasion; if deployed, its pro- actually go to war with them. By theirI
ponents say, it would kill only Soviet very size, they deter war.
soldiers, leaving civilians unharmed. But the neutron bomb isn't that
The bomb's opponents say these gruesome. In the event of land war,
tlings: it would kill slowly and pain- commanders would prolably use 'it.
fully; deployment of any nuclear And that is why it is so repugnant; it is
weapon is likely to lead to more and a usable nuclear weapon, and a first
greater nuclear warfare; production of step in that direction is a terribly reck-
the neutron bomb is anathema to the less and dangerous one. '
S K Me IEIE osSEi D - r E 1t% t O A ' EAW iF I1 5 ID!'
I T5 ?!4 ON~ P&RPS.S TO A 1 4lt E|TV. '
- A AN cwG iy lCW NeFMArA CA I

Americans are in the mood for spite. We butted out of Vietnam in
disgrace, and that memory still rankles. We've had to tolerate hijack-
ing of our ships and planes, and gratuitous insults from fourth-rate
dictators who dress in things that look like marching band uniforms.
We're sick of all that, and we're ready to spite someone.
That someone is Panama. According to a recent Associated Press
poll, 50 per cent of those surveyed opposed Senate ratification of the
proposed canal treaties. Only 29 per cent favored it, and 21 per cent
expressed no opinion. Robert Byrd, Senate Majority Leader, tells us
that "To bring the treaty up this fall would ensure its rejection," and
that strong Senate opposition will persist as long as public opinion is
clearly against the treaty.
SO THE TREATY may face a tough fight ahead. And that's really
a shame, because thinking personstonboth the left and right agree that
ratification would serve the best interests of the United States and
Liberals and conservatives reason in different ways to the same
conclusion, of course, and as usual, the liberals' thought is foolish. For
some reason, the Panamanians have more right to the canal than we
do, they say. This is odd, because the Panamanians' grandfathers
signed away the property on a perpetual lease - primarily in grati-
tude for our assistance in creating their country out of territory
previously controlled by Columbia. Nor can the Panamanians claim
aboriginal rights (a faulty concept anyway) because, like us, they are
a nation of immigrants. We built the canal. We paid for it. The
Panamanians have less right to it than the Mexiebns have to Colorado.
On the other hand, the conservative argument, based on pure ex-
pediency, has much merit. The conservative first accepts that the only
reasons for our continued presence in Panama are (1) to ensure the
continued efficient operation of the canal for commercial and
peacetime military purposes; and (2) to provide for the defense of the
canal in the event of war.
THE CONSERVATIVE next accepts that if these aims can be ser-
ved better by shifting control of the canal to someone else, then that
shift should be made.
'Regarding the first aim, there might be some dispute. The
abilities of Panamanian engineers and administrators are not exactly
legendary. But under the treaty provisions, we'll retain primary ad-
ministrative responsibility until 1990, and a subordinate, consultative
role after that. This should give enough time to train the Pana-

In the mood for spite,
Americans are ready to
lean on someone else after'
leaning on themselves for
a decade. The place: the
Panama Canal.
Regarding defense: under the treaty, we'll keep primary defense
responsibility until 2000, and contingent intervention rights after-
wards. That's fine. But consider it further. There are three ways to at-
tack the canal - from the air, sea, or land. Air and sea attacks would
come from certain powerful nations, probably as part of a general
world conflict. And in that case, we wouldn't need the Panama bases
for canal defense anyway. Guerrilla attacks would be far more likely,;
and repulsing these without Panama's support wouldibe impossible.
Panama, in fact, would probably be the attacker.
SO IT'S NOT a zero-sum game, and the conservative, in the clear
light of reason, sees that the treaty will be mutually beneficial.
If the American people were aware of these arguments, they,
might think the same thing. But they are not aware. Who is at fault?
The news media, of course. Instead of telling the American people,'
that the treaty is desirable on purely expedient grounds - the only;
criterion of interest to most Americans - they've gone in for self--_
flagellating, hair-shirt drivel about how we owe the Panamanians the;'
canal. We should give it to them in the spirit of penance, they say.
But Americans are in the mood for spite. They've had enough of
self-flagellation, and now they want to flagellate someone else. And
the more the media enjoins them to penance, the whiter their knuckles
become as they clench the whip.
So the media can make the treaty or break it. If the ratification.,
fails, we will have only the media to blame - and we can look forward
to another little war or a disgraceful butt-out.
How good are you at carrying a 70-pound pack through jungle?

Letters to

The Daily

star wars
To The Daily:
Your recent spot in the "To-
day" section concerning the Star
Wars halftime show to be pre-
sented this Saturday by the
Michigan Marching Band was
surprisingly unfair. I, too, am
tired of the Star Wars'parapher-
nalia which have been popping up
all over campus, but what of all
those loyal U of Mers who have
trekked back to the theater four,
five, six times? The band has
chosen a show theme and ac-
companying music for their Sat-
urday show which will surely ap-
peal to most of their stadium au-
dience. Furthermore, since the
band itself had not gone over the
entire show by Tuesday, how
could a member of your staff
have been informed enough to
make a remark like "get your
free earmuffs"? Our band works
incredible hours to put on an en-
tertaining halftime show each
home Saturday, and I, for one,
am willing to see and listen to the
show before digging out my ear-
Trish Refo
September 29
To The Daily:
It is a little difficult to know the
point of the article about Japa-
nese foreign students by Chris

Goodall which ran in the Daily
last week. A number of factual
errors can be cleared up easily,
but the implications of what he
writes are bothersome.
Let me deal with facts first.
Mr. Goodall does not know many
Japanese students very well, or
he would not think that few
women go overseas to study or
that Japanese universities are .
modeled on American universi-
ties. And from where comes his
notion that in Japan "all busi-
ness is done face-to-face with peo-
ple you know, preferably, for sev-
eral years"? Surely that cozy
pattern is more characteristic of
American firms, where execu-
tives often stay in the same job
for some time, rather than being
rotated every two or three years
as in Japan.
These matters are not major,
but the claim that Japanese fore-
ign students have flooded uni-
versities around the world is cen-
tral to his argument. ". . . in the
best academic institutions across
Europe, Asia and America there
will often be more Japanese than
any other foreign nationality. As
only the shortsighted will have
missed, the University of Michi-
gan is no exception to the general
rule." Such points are quite easi-
ly checked. A telephone call to
the International Center is
enough to find out that for 1977,
among the eleven nations repre-
sented by at least 50 foreign

students at the University, Japan
ranked seventh, behind Canada,
India, Iran, Taiwan, South Korea
and Nigeria.
SUCH UP-TO-DATE statistics
were not available about num-
bers of foreign students world
wide, but the latest edition (1975)
of the UNESCO yearbook re-
veals that in 1973 there were
about 5,000 Japanese students in
the United States, a number ex-
ceeded by, for example, Hong
Kong, Taiwan and Thailand.
Many countries, including Hong
Kong, Egypt, Italy and even the
United Kingdom (which has only
about one-sixth the number of
university students as Japan)
had more of their students study-
ing abroad. Finally, since some
of Mr. Goodall's impressions
were gained in England, where
he went to school, let me note that
in 1972 there were fully 229 Japa-
nese students in the United King-
dom, a number exceeded by such
lands as Uganda and Cyprus. The
author's difficulty at this univer-
sity may be too great a reliance
on eyesight, and confounding our
99 Japanese students with our 407
Chinese or Korean students.
I have provided rather a bar-
rage of facts, but find it more in-
teresting to ask what image Mr.
Goodall is trying to convey to us.
He says reality is more mundane
than a "gigantic plan to subvert
Western culture," but then does
imply quite clearly that Japa-

nese students are sent out by the
government or giant business'
firms to learn how to manipulate'
western governments and com-F
panies and to line up business{
contacts (for use 20 years hen
ce?), and he warns us to guard
our daddies' business secrets.'"
Good heavens! In fact, few =
students are sent over here by
firms or governmentali
ministries, but mainly to give
them a little international ex-
perience and improve their Eng-''
lish. A much greater number are';
ordinary students, here for the
same motives or to receive train-
ing not available in Japan. When
one thinks about it calmly, what
else could they be doing?
And what else sshould they be
doing? As Mr. Goodall does point
out quite correctly, Japan is an,
insular country and can use anyM
international exposure it can get,
especially by the young. It would
be to everyone's advantage too if.,
more people around the world
could get to know some Japanese.
Sensible people will applaud an.
increase in Japanese foreign stu-.
dents, at Michigan or elsewhere,
and would be delighted to see a
doubling or tripling of their num-t'
John Campbell
Assistant Professor off;
Political Science
September 27




weather r orecasterb.
Inle -.T I.- __A aRTVL+ In TT L+fi C1 T

Back to Top

© 2022 Regents of the University of Michigan