6 OPINION Page 4 Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Wednesday, January 28, 1981 Higgins The Michigan Daily Am Vol. XCI, No. 101 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Far from a student vote :1 4't / \\ ( tran "si tion \trans- ish-an\n pass,38c - rom one stage to another. UNCERTAIN. That may be the best word to describe the at- mosphere up on the fourth floor of the LSA Building, home of the geography department. The handful of faculty members there learned Monday that their depar- tment is the first to have been targeted for review and possible elimination as part of the massive and painful budget cutbacks necessary in the near future. Uncertainty also surrounds the status of students in the review process that will help determine the fate of the geography department. The Univer- sity's program discontinuance guidelines are rather nebulous; they say that students should be given an opportunity to participate, but they *do not indicate how or to what degree. At the same time, the guidelines specify that a peer review of the depar- tment under scrutiny be perfor- med-that means a review by faculty members. Therefore, the composition of the review committee is open to some in- terpretation-depending on how much one values student participation. LSA Dean John Knott has opted to follow the "peer review" specification set out in the guidelines. The review committee, he said, will be comprised of 'faculty members only. "The procedures call for a peer review," Knott said yesterday. "That in my mind precludes students, whether or not it would be good to have them." The dean did say, to his credit, that he has no desire to exclude student opinion, and that it was his intent that students be given an opportunity to ad- dress the review committee. But that is not enough. The discon- tinuance of any program, department, or field.of study at the University af- fects all members of the University community. Certainly it must be gran- ted that faculty members have more at stake than students when it, comes to phasing out programs. Yet students, for whom courses are designed, have significant interest in what academic options will be open to them. We urge Dean Knott to provide more than the rather casual opportunities for student participation he has outlined. It's one thing to address a committee; it's another to be a mem- ber of it. Students could be incorporated into the review committee without im- pairing the peer review requirement. Perhaps maintaining a faculty majority on the committee would be sufficient to insure that faculty mem- bers make the final recommendation. Even relegating students to an ad- visory role on the committee would be better than what. Knott has so far proposed-which is nothing. ?1~l Q D/ l; /O? dSzR w 6 AWk IS, ni 1 f r , g ' \ \ 1/ 1/ \ \\ \\ i \\ \ \ V / 0 I) j "Scriptwriter . . . I don't like this part about a treaty with the Indians." "Speechwriter ... I don't like this part about a treaty with the Russians." Central America c U.S. to, maintain si Chnese. K EY TO THE Un foreign policy in relationship that has de the People's Republic of C past few years. From Ric first visit to the official r mainland China under Ji an increasingly relaxed been nurtured by the two] The need for peacefulr China is obvious. It populous and among the countries in the worl relationship with Chin necessitated by consideri it has on the Soviet Uni healthy U.S.-China relati the Soviets from stockpili The Reagan administr opportunity to damageI friendship. Recently ministration has come un ited States' to approve the sale of the FX fighter Asia is the plane to the non-Communist Chinese veloped with government on Taiwan. Many 'hina over the Washington conservatives are eager to chard Nixon's see the sale go through as a sign of in- ecognition of creased commitment to Taiwan. mmy Carter, Peking, however, has warned against attitude has doing so. nations. ' - relations with At this point, U.S.-Chinese relations is theon wt need to be strengthened, not set back. is te most It would be a mistake for the United - most stable States to approve sale of weapons to d. A strong Taiwan-a country not officially ng the effects recogniied by the U.S. government an. Certainly and a hated adversary of Chinas-if it onCertainly, intends to maintain and improve a ons help deter growing friendship. ng weapons. ation has the this growing the ad- nder pressure President Reagan ought to the pressure from conservative and shelve the sale of the FX plane to Taiwan.. ignore groups fighter MANAGUA, NICARAGUA-"No, we do not expect to have 'correct' relations with the Reagan administration," said the Sandinista revolutionary, a member~ of Nicaragua's civilian-military junta. "We intend to have excellent relations with President Reagan and the United States."1 The Nicaraguan leader, Sergio Ramirez, may have been whistling in the dark. If any Central American government should fear the wrath of a Reagan presidency, it is Nicaragua. In fact, as the new administration takes of- fice, no government in Central America is seriously counting on a dramatic im- piovement in U.S. relations. But none, either, is willing to accept the refrains of "Hall to the Chief" now resounding in Washington as the trumpet of doom. THE RATHER MODERATE degrees of hope-or fear-expressed throughout the eight. small countries of Central America ap- pear t6 contrast sharply with the widespread assumption in Washington that President Reagan will radically re-orient U.S. policy here to a realpolitik approach of strong sup- port for local anti-communists. The expected Reagan policy of stern militancy against the left also contrasts sharply with the widespread American view of President Car- ter's policy as one characterized by. U.S. weakness and a naive emphasis on human rights. Yet visits to all eight countries of Cen- tral America indicate that the Central American shift in U.S. policy may be less dramatic under President Reagan than many expect. The first point to consider is that Jimmy Carter's own Central American policy, in spite of its human rights rhetoric, differed very lit- tle in essential approach from that which President Reagan has said he intends to pur- sue. When faced with a choice between sup- porting the reactionary right or even the moderate left, Carter instinctively and strongly supported the right. And even in terms of a conservativeRepublicanagen- da, the Carter policy was not the utter disaster the GOP campaign made it seem. SOME EXAMPLES OF the traditionally hard-line policies the United States followed under President Carter: " In Nicaragua, where Carter was denoun- ced as being particularly soft on Com- munism, he in fact did what his reputedly more conservative predecessors in the White House did. He supported a discredited dic- tator, even when it was clear he was losing, until the bitter end. In a human rights tragedy reminiscent of the final days of Vietnam, about one in ten of all Nicaraguans was either killed, wounded, or orphaned lest an American President disavow an ally, and hence lose "credibility" in the world. Carter's sole innovation lay in retaining diplomatic and economic relations with Nicaragua after the U.S.-backed dictator fell. " I El Salvador, Carter repeated this same traditional U.S. approach to the Third World. Rather than countenance the emergence of a broad civilian coalition in El Salvador, ranging from devout Catholics through liberals and social democrats to Marxists, he shored up, with crucial diplomatic and military support, a military-dominated junta under which some of the most grotesque vinltinns of human rights in the history of By T. D. Allman venience a much higher priority than Central American social or economic justice. Carter, for example, Arongly opposed Central and South American efforts to form a coffee car- tel, and succeeded in having the organization disbanded. One result: Coffee prices in U.S. supermarkets today are at a long-time low, while many Central Americans are in desperate economic straits. The collapse of coffee prices is the single greatest factor destabilizing Costa Rican democracy today. If, beneath the talk of human rights, Carter in fact accumulated a record in Central America worthy of the Nixon Doctrine or Ronald Reagan's campaign rhetoric, he also achieved some significant successes by con- servative standards : t In Belize, Carter forestalled any potential. Cuban opening by shifting U.S. policy from one of "even-handedness" about Guatemala's claims on the territory to a policy of outright support at the U.N. for Belizan independence from British control. High-ranking Belizan of- ficials say they will be looking for U.S. aid following independence. Perhaps with that in mind, they also make it clear that they have no intention of permitting the Cubans or their allies to establish embassies or aid programs in Belize. " In Panama, the canal treaties provided the GOP with much ammunition in the anti- Carter campaign, but in fact under Carter U.S. influence, always paramount in that country, reached what may be an historical peak. Under the treaties, the U.S. kept its military bases in Panama, the U.S. dollar remained the official currency and American penetration of the whole of Panamanian society remained virtually total. In return for letting the Panamanians have the privilegeof flying their flag over the canal, the Carter administration in fact won the privilege to in- tervene unilaterally with its armed forces in -expect tatus quo whenever Washington deemed it necessary. For all the talk of a U.S. "giveaway" in Panama, that country remains almost totally subservient to the United States. TO EXAMINE THE Carter record in Cen- tral America in terms of reality-rather than6 in terms of its own rhetoric or that of its critics-is to come to a new definition of President Reagan's policy options in the area. The real question is not whether Rteagan will bring sweeping changes to U.S. policy in this part of the world. Rather, the question is: Will Reagan be able to fipd anything to do here that Jimmy Carter was not doing already? It is clear that, except in terms of cosmetics and rhetoric, no substantive changes are likely,in U.S.-Central Amer'ica relations. Reagan has vowed to abide by the Panama Canal treaties. In Guatemala the Reagan White House may smile on local repression where Car'ter frowned on it. But no U.S. administration seems to have either the power or the will to actually change the internal situation in Guatemala, a naturally-rich country which needs no U.S. aid. Thus, among the eight countries of Central America, there are only two-El Salvador and Nicaragua-where any substantial change in U.S. policy under President Reagan would appear possible. But even there the rational options are limited to accelerating policies already underway, not to reversing them. "Reagan may do more than 'Carter did," one disillusioned Salvadoran commented, "but he can only compound the tragedy Car- ter created. The catastrophe is already upon us. Reagan may send more guns, bullets, and bombs but this is already a country drowning in blood." T. D. Allman is a contributing editor to Harper's Magazine and an editor of the Pacific News Service, for which he wrote this article. - _ T R _'.. , , V'( 7 j/ l } ---- - y , ,,' i'N FR S10 5 1 Z . i - J J .Y ___.a a0 -4 0l 2 rm r n ::;, . _:.z~.ruu dd