Page 4
OPINION
Thursday, February 5, 1981
The Michigan Daily
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan
420 Maynard St.
Vol. XCI, No. 108 Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board
Neutron bomb would ruin
chance for arms control
American
support
for Korea
may
backfire
0
T HE SABER-RATTLING at the
Department of Defense continues
to grow. This time the saber has taken
the form of the neutron bomb, which
Secretary of Defense Caspar Wein-
berger said Tuesday may be added to
the U.S. arsenal. Sadly, it comes as no
surprise that the Reagan ad-
ministration should consider resurrec-
ting the horrifying neutron bomb. Ac-
celerating the stockpiling of nuclear
weaponry is consistent with Reagan's
hard-line campaign rhetoric of
military superiority.
Yet, the re-development of the
neutron bomb would represent two
potential dangers. The most obvious of
the two is that the senseless buildup of
nuclear weapons would only increase
the risk of their use. Such a growing
glut of nuclear missiles and bombs
would contribute to world tension,
already at a dangerously high level.
The second potential danger would
have an even more certain detrimental
effect on U.S. foreign relations.
Reagan announced Monday that he
Anti-Semitis
would be willing to negotiate with the
Soviet Union on the possibility of future
further arms control. Yet, at the same
time he insisted on an increased U.S.
military presence in the sensitive Per-
sian Gulf region. And now, Weinberger
has discussed the possibility of
bringing back the neutron bomb.
The Soviets have clearly stated that
both of these actions would endanger
the future of any possible arms
limitations negotiations. These moves
would only be interpreted by the
Soviets as direct U.S. threats to their
security. If Reagan follows through on
either or both of these courses of ac-
tion, it will further erode already-
shaky American-Soviet relations.
If Reagan has any real commitment
to arms control, he must realize that
provocation and antagonism will
destroy any chance of serious
negotiations. If Reagan does not seek
intelligent controls on the stockpiling
of nuclear weaponry, he must be
prepared to plunge America into a sen-
seless race for nuclear arms and
military dominance.
a, neo-Nazis
President Reagan's meeting in Washington
with South Korean dictator Chu Doo Hwan
Monday may seem inconsequential to
Americans accustomed to visits by foreign
leaders. But for Koreans - and Asians in
general - the state visit this early in the new
administration is regarded as an important
harbinger of U.S. policy aims in the Far East,
as well as clear affirmation of American sup-
port for Chun's regime.
Chun will use it in every possible way to
shore up his unstable rule. The nation's
carefully-controlled newspapers will feature
the visit, headlining any favorable comments
by Reagan or his aides on events in Korea.
Commemorative postage stamps will even be
issued. In short, the meeting offers a tremen-
dous boost to a dictator desperately in search
of legitimacy, and the prospect of an eventual
disaster for U.S. foreign policy.
SHORTLY AFTER THE assassination of
President Park Chung Hee, on December 12,
1979, Chun mounted an army coup and shot
his way into the Korean equivalent of the Pen-
tagon. In so doing, he grossly violated
American-Korean joint troop-command
procedures, mobilizing troops supposedly
defending South Korea from the North, sen-
ding high generals fleeing to the protection of
the American command, and causing what
high U.S. officials referred to as a "crisis" in,
Korean-American relations.
Nevertheless, South Korea enjoyed a
remarkable period of democratic par-
ticipation through the early months of 1980.
But it proved to be a brief experiment. Chun
soon had himself appointed head of the
draconian Korean Central Intelligence Agen-
cy, touching off student demonstrations that
engulfed Seoul in mid-May. Although martial
law was declared and most leading politicians
were arrested, the dissatisfaction spread.
Citizens in the major southwestern city of
Kwangju rebelled, seizing control of that city
and many neighboring counties. Chun or-
LETTERS TO THE DAILY:
By Bruce Cumings
dered paratroopers into the region - again in
violation of joint command policies - to put
down the rebellion with brute force. Soldiers,
some of them allegedly on drugs, terrorized
the city and slaughtered demonstrators, even
to the point of mutilating college coeds and
using flamethrowers.
In the period since Kwangju, Chun has had
himself appointed President, arrested
thousands more, proscribed the activities of'
some 900 leading politicians, and arranged
kangaroo courts for dissidents including the
popular former Presidential candidate, Kim
Dae Jung. Kim was kidnapped from his exile
in Japan in 1973 by Korean intelligence agen-
ts, and subsequently sentenced to death last
year. But Japanese and world-wide condem-
nation of the act forced the Korean gover-
nment to reduce the sentence to life im-
prisonment.
THROUGHOUT THESE fifteen months of
crisis, the Carter administration tolerated
Chun's brutality and eventually supported his
accession to total power. President Reagan's
charge that Carter held our allies to unduly
high standards was decidedly not the case in
Korea, and Secretary of State Alexander
Haig's assertion that human rights will be
further downplayed in U.S. foreign policy
bodes ill for Korean-American relations.
In fact, those Koreans resisting Chun are
not primarily leftists, but rather democrats,
Christians, and educated intellectuals who
have long looked to the U.S. for support. In the
past fifteen months, many of them have em-
braced a bitter anti-Americanism unseen
here for decades. The exiled Korean press
also is more critical of the U.S. than at any
ttime in recent memory.
AMERICAN POLICY-MAKERS must un-
derstand that South Korea, in the teeth of a
harsh depression, could go the way or Iran,
alienating America's natural allies as well as
its critics. Moreover, tension on the peninsula
has heightened alarmingly. Chun's visit will
coincide with a combined military exercise,
"Team Spirit '81", in which some 161,000
American and Korean troops will participate,
including 34,000 American soldiers flown in
from bases outside Korea. North Korea war-
ned last month that this gigantic exercise
could bring events "to the brink of war."
All of these pressures are building at a time
when the South Korean economy is
degenerating, with inflation in 1980 at 44 per-
cent, negative growth for the first time in fif-
teen years, and a trade deficit of $6 billion -
one fifth of GNP.
The rice harvest in 1980 fell by some 30 per-
cent. A recent, secret study of the Korean
economy by the World Bank leaked to the
Wall Street Journal, predicted more
political disorder in 1981, little chance for
quick economic revival, and advised only
short-term lending by banks. Several large
companies have-already defaulted on loans,
and the financial condition seems committed
to a policy which will risk political stability,
economic recovery, and the peace of the
peninsula on the future of an unpopular dic-
tator.
Furthermore, that Korea policy is part and
parcel of a general American policy toward
Asia seemingly designed to reverse the ad-
vances of the 1970s, bringing a renewed
coolness toward Peking along with warmth
for Taiwan. And it matches a general global
policy of support for tottering dictatorships.
In the 1950s such policies could serve
American interests because the U.S. strad-
dled and dominated the globe. In the 1980s
they may spell disaster.
Bruce Cumings, an expert on Korea at
the University of Washington, wrote this
article for the Pacific News Service.
01
need powerful opposition
A
two
NEG-NAZI group in
Germany has threatened
Jews at random unless
West
to kill
their
demands are met. The group-the
Rudolf Hess Restitution Comman-
do-has demanded $7 million for a fund
to free Hess, Hitler's right-hand-man
in World War II now serving a life
prison sentence.
Moves such as these by neo-Nazi
groups are growing increasingly
evident in 1981. Even though it is con-
fined to a very small group, this
blatant anti-Semitism is indeed very
frightening. The thought of it
proliferating in modern-day Europe is
devastating, to say the least.
But threats like those made by the
group and occurances like the bombing
of a Synagogue in Paris last year,
suggest that anti-Semitism is alive and
well in western Europe.
As frightening as these isolated in-
eidents are the way in which people
react to them could be even more
terrifying.
In order to check this kind of growing
anti-Semitism, people must actively
oppose it. Passivity will not work here;
that was clearly evident in pre-war
Germany.
The test for the German people will
be in how they react to these neo-Nazis.
If they report the actions of fascist
groups and actively oppose them the
deplorable acts can e held {o a
minimum. If they quietly sit back and
turn the other way, anti-Semitism will
fester and spread throughout the
nation. The temptation to use one
group for a scape goat as the economy
sags must also be avoided.
Certainly the Rudolf Hess group's
recent threats are despicable. All must
work diligently to thwart such factions,
and ensure that history does not repeat
itself.
Daily pompous, biased, and pro- 'U'
1~ -
To the Daily:
Well, Mark Parrent's parting
editorial in the Feb. 1 issue really
was the last straw. We're can-
celing our subscription, a little
embarrassed that we were
misguided enough to have one in
the first place.
We do appreciate the former
editor-in-chief's upfrontness in
stating that the Daily is not a
student newspaper. That fact had
started to sink in, but we were glad
to have it from the man himself.
So you're "looking for stories that
are of interest to [your]
readers"? Perhaps we were
mistaken but we had assumed the
majority of your readers to be
students. We think your claim to
be responsible to your readership
is a lie.
What about Parrent's ad-
monition to us readers that we
"must understand that the Daily
is an organization that seeks to
publish campus, national, and in-
ternational news without bias and
without a feeling of obligation to
any special group?" Seems to
Cease wage
To the Daily:
Once upon a time people were
paid for the work they did. When
they worked,.they got paid; when
they didn't work, they didn't get
paid. If they worked harder and
produced more, or if they
produced better goods, they got
paid more. If they produced less,
they received less (or got fired).
That was the American Way.
Today the reasons people give
for wanting pay raises are
ludicrous. They think that the
longer they've worked for so-and-
so, the more he or she should pay
them. These neonle feel that the
ring a bit false when half the front
page was devoted to football
throughout the fall season. And it
seems ominously two-faced when
copious space on the op/ed page
is repeatedly given to
Moonie/CARP member Art
Humbert at the expense of other
points of view.
So you publish "balanced
features"? What this really
means, if we can judge from the
past year, is that you have a
strict policy against covering
minority events and campus
labor and a strict pro-University
stand. You have consistently
refused to publish stories on
Chicano or Black activities on
campus (not surprising, given
the composition of the Daily
staff). You have almost as con-
sistently refused to cover ac-
tivities of unions, organizing
committees, and labor support
groups (e.g. GEO, OCC, and
FLOC Support). And the Univer-
sity administration always
comes out shining, through labor
disputes, program cutbacks, and
in creases
the U.A.W., have done much good
for everyone overall. But what
Daniel Berger (Daily, January
31) and the unions and all people
everywhere have to realize is
that these continuous standard-
of-living increases cannot con-
tinue. The world doesn't work
this way. We are running out of
oil and we have no visible means
of replacing the massive quan-
tities of energy we use except
(and not even then) at the cost of
the environment. But we need our
environment (that is, an en-
vironment in good condition) to
Distinctions on co-ops
: Q
1
f
wasteful spending. (The Univer-
sity doesn't need to subsidize the
Daily.)
Your self-importance is em-
barrassing. We've never seen a
paper so filled with trivia and at
the same time so pompous. El
Salvador is becoming another
Vietnam, and from the Daily
scarcely a word - instead you
run photographs of dog-bite vic-
tims.
Your quest for unbiased news is
doomed. There is no such thing.
The news you choose to run, the
I
words you use, the order of the
paragraphs - all of it
manipulates public opinion. So.
the question is, what ideology are
you supporting? We've figured
that out (and we suspect you have
too). Give us our money back, we
can put it to more progressive
use.
-Richard Lewis
James Liebman
Lisa Palmer
Robert Rice
Katherine Yih
February 2
To the Daily:
I realize that the probability
that anybody actually read your
derogatory article on co-ops
(Daily, February 1) is decidedly
low. However, in the interests of
journalistic purity-a goal I know
the Daily strives to maintain-I
feel compelled to correct your
suggestion that all co-opers are
communists. In actuality people
who live in communes are com-
mune-ists and people who sub-
scribe to the teachings of Marx,
Lenin and the Peking Daily are
communists.. We 3 of course are
neither. We are cooperatists.
Please do not confuse us with
commune-ists or communists.
Moreover, our per term
charges are not $200. $200 would
seem entirely excessive, con-
sidering that all we eat is millet
seed. After all, $200 buys a lot of
millet seed. Of course, there are-
costs other than just food. We
must pay for seasonings for the
bats'that we catch, and, on non-
veggie days, eat. Another expen-
sive item is The Michigan Daily
to which we subscribe. We do af-
ter all'have a lot of bat cages to
line.
-Bart Casad
February 3
P
Victim photo disgusting
To the Daily:
I would like to register my
disgust over your publication of
the photograph of Tom Reed
(Daily, Jan. 31).
With all the pictures you can
choose from each day, it is dif-
ficult to understand why you
chose to prominently display this
iniure~d hnu Tc is he eantin o9
sationalized) account from
Associated Press?
To publish such a picture
without further explanation is a
disservice. If you believed it was
a newsworthy picture, why do we
have so little information? Are all
Alaskan malamutes vicious?
Was the dog provoked or sick?
P.".' "A
Ad