01 OPINION Page 4 Sunday, March 15, 1981 The Michigan Daily A foreign policy to avoid past mistakes By Joshua Aaronson President Reagan's denial of the allegation that El Salvador is becoming another Vietnam is highly suspect. It does not take an Arthur Schlesinger to see that there are some striking resemblances between our current situation in Central America and our earliest intervention in Indochina. However, even if one can manage to side with Reagan in this case, it is obvious that Washington has not learned the lessons of its past failures. Since World War II, American foreign policy has been characterized by a failure to properly translate our military power and technological superiority into effective action in the Third World. This is beacuse our foreign policy has been shaped by two major elements: The desire to further our own economic interests, and the fear of Communism. Although the fear of Communism has been in the forefront of American policy for some time, all too often have we at- tempted to further our interests in a particular area under the guise of preventing the spread of Communism. Furthermore, the United States has had to come to the defense of right-wing, oppressive regimes because of the need to maintain the status quo, primarily because we have felt that the best way to further our capitalistic interests. Based on these characterizations, the United States has fought ideological wars for all the wrong reasons, and in doing so has incurred the wrath of many Third World nations. The tolls that America has been using to meet the goals of its foreign policy have become dangerously outmoded. In both its covert and overt activities, American has failed to remain sensitive to the political climate of any number of Third World countries. The irrelevance of its means to its en- ds has made failure the rule for most of American foreign policy. These are just a few of the many inadequacies of American foreign policy. As America's goals become more elusive and unfortunately more vague, the inadequacies become even more sharply underscored. Ideologies predicated on selfish economic interests, a basic egocentrism that has underpin- ned almost all foreign policy, an insensitivity to the social se would be for America to formulate a policy that would withdraw support from any government whose country was torn by civil war. (This of course would only be realistic iO the Third World. It is hard to imagine the United States remaining neutral in a civil war in England.) r0 An even more radical policy, although one that makes perhaps more sense is a policy that would entice revolutionaries into our camp as opposed to the Soviets. It would matter little to us what type of government they for- med, for as Tito has shown their are other types of Com- munism other than the Soviet-backed Communism. This policy certainly seems more sensible than alienating an entire country to support a government that will inevitably fall, and being left with tarnished reputation, as well as a new enemy. Furthermore, if one oppressive regime is replaced by another, as may sometimes happen, it should matter little to us which tyrant we support, (if we are going to support it at all), provided, of course, that he is willing to have relations with us. These policies have obvious ramifications in El Salvador. However, I hardly expect to be drafted to the State Depar- tment. What Washington needs to realize is that its policies in the Third World have been and still are woefully' inadequate. The policies must be based on either economic interests or ideologies, but we cannot continue to shroud one in the other and expect them to be successful. An intelligent, cogent, con- sistent policy based on ideology will no doubt reap for 'us greater economic benefits than one that ineffectively com- bines both of them. However, at all times, it is of the utmost importance th4t we be aware of the pragmatic side of international polities. This is neither contradictory to, nor does it preclude, con- =sistent ideology. As the political power of the United States declines in the international arena, the formulation of such policies becomes even more imperative. _ . AN AMERICAN SOLDIER guides the landing of U.S. troops in Vietnam in 1968. President Reagan and Secretary of State conditions in various countries that is bred out of the aforementioned reasons, short-sightedness, and inconsisten- cy have marred American foreign policy. Yet, with all this the desire to prevent the spread of Com- munism has been the major theme in our policies for over thirty years. What America has failed to realize is that Moscow is as far away from the "hotspots" of the world as is Washington. Try though they may, Moscow has found it increasingly difficult to influence the events in many countries to their liking. Moscow does not want to see Communism spread unless it is their Communism - though any Communism is preferable to American capitalism. Revolutionaries in many countries are just as weary of the Alexander haig discuss the future direction of American foreign policy during a Senate hearing. Soviets as they are of Americans. Yet, America continues to support the oppressive regimes that are in power so they have no one else to turn to. If America is going to play hardball on the field of Realpolitik, then it is going to have to learn how to hit the curve. Policies that would enable the United States to do so would, moreover, l e in concert with what until now has been a farcical policy of human rights in foreign policy. In countries where America has supported oppressive right-wing governments, and where there has been a revolution or civil war, the American-backed regime has almost invariably fallen, and they have lost whatever economic interest they might once have had. In light of this,it would appear that a more intelligent cour- Joshua Aaronson is an LSA sophomore majoring in history. 0 Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Vol. XCI, No. 133 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Weasel BOOKS FOR, rr RApPND 706T THE 1rif PA FRESHMtAN? WH4EN L WAS LOOKIK& A A RLO P MAP'. THE. TE..RAINl Th CLE. u-AE- OF SFATtxL. 'ANALN.SLs! -T+C5WPY of THE- EA RTIft ! GEOGRAPlY! TI4AT5 MiE! THATS WH~AT Z IWANT TO PWIRMY L Fe! X'I ZEAU2( i.OKN& POrWA TD' THE, ?~aT Wk~ATS TH4E NJAM R7 WHY \ARE. You LOOKIN& AT ME. L4KE- THikr? by Robert Len ce Z KNJ'OW.... fT CAN BE, A-Hs AZIKNOW Ygou, KFACT YOU ARE. A STREET R~AT 740( ")sI S Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Reagan and student loans T HE REAGAN administration is, in effect, punishing students for the inefficiency of the'bureaucracies that administer and supervise guaranteed student loans. Federal officials say they hope that by phasing out programs, imposing a cut-off amount on the level of parental income, and restricting applicants they can salvage as much as $138 million in federal money. The recommendation presented to Congress this week proposes removal of the federally subsidized loan in- terest while students are enrolled in school. If implemented, Reagan's measure will likely make it very dif- ficult for students to get any kind of loan at all, University Financial Aid of- ficials say. Banks would naturally be reluctant to sponsor a program that would entail increased paperwork; state loan programs are having their own finan- cial crunch; National Direct Student Loans could well be phased out over the next four years. The administration claims that the cutbacks were largely spurred by wide-spread abuse of student loans. University figures show that at least nine percent of those obtaining loans fail to pay them back on schedule after graduation, and it's well-known that GSLs go to a wide variety of student "needs'' besides tuition. If the administration were to invest even a little more money and effort to stem the abuse through closer super- vision of loan applicants, the return from that investment could help finan- ce continued loans for students who do not abuse the program. Once students were caught abusing their loan priviledges, they could suffer im- mediate discontinuance of the loan and future ineligibility. This stricter enforcement of the program's guidelines could make the program much more financially ef- ficient and would continue to provide the essential loans to those students who really need them for tuition. i ; 1- -j PIRGIM fundin ti v- 9 PIRGIM service deserves support A To the Daily: I was disappointed earlier this week as I stood with a Public Interest Research Group in Michigan petition in my hand and watched yet another person drift by without so much as a sign of recognition, or worse with a look of disdain. Granted, there were a lot of volunteers waving clipboards in front of your faces and , .disrupting important trains of thought, but didn't the mere number of shivering petitioners say something? I for one was not standing outside in the cold for nine hours on two cups of coffee and a quickly wolfed-down hamburger for nothing. The PIRGIM people were devoting their precious time in an attempt to wake some people up. In 1972, 16,000 students signed a similar petition to demand the creation of a PIRGIM on campus, to be funded by a mandatory fee on the tuition. The issues were the same in those days. Are we to sit here and say we don't care as much about the water we drink; as they did in the 60s? Now I don't consider myself a radical, although I will admit I need a haircut, but I do see that there is a way to change some of those thing we complain about. If you want to get patriotic, the very make- up of our country is based on people screaming for change, people sick of being forced to pay high prices or live where their health and human rights are being threatened. Remember the Boston Tea Par- ty? I do not agree with every stand that PIRGIM takes. In fact, I don't think anyone can be totally in agreement with such a broad based organization, but I do believe that everyone can be positively affected by PIRGIM's work. The positive check-off system has proven inadequate. PIRGIM is not being effective with its limited amounts of monies now, it is just surviving. It simply cannot fight to lower utility rates or to promote tenant rights when it is in competition with conglomerates whose lobbying budgets alone consist of over $30 million. By using the University tuition billing -system, PIRGIM could reach more people to tell them exactly what is being done and wake up enough support to have a stronger voice. The PIRGIM fee will be the only democratic fee on the bill because people know where their money is going and still have a choice. For comparison's sake, the Michigan Student Assembly fee is mandatory and no one has a say aboit what MEA does with its money.Besides, how often do you get such a guarantee? If you do not get results, PIRGIM will fully refund your fee. As far as educational value, I have learned more by working for PIRGIM in the last three weeks than many courses have taught me in a whole semester. I believe it is called ex- perimental leanringboreducation through relevant application. And folks, when you get right down to it, you are paying only $2. Hell, the cover charge ftr one night at the bars cost that much. I am not asking everyone to give their time to PIRGIM, I am asking you to think about what PIRGIM is doing for you. Let's give PIRGIM a chance to show us what can be done. -David Sharken March 13 Negative check-off underhanded tactic (', a VV To the Daily: It appears that after years of struggling against the underhanded tactics of businessmen, landlords and other subversve conservative elements in Michigan, the Public Interest Research Group in Michigan has succumbed to the omnipresent danger of learning one too many tricks from it adver- saries. I refer to PIRGIM's proposed clever new funding plan whereby students who do not wish to support this noble radical chic organization will be forced to return a form with their first tuition bill. The present form and send it to the state government."? Unquestionably, PIRGIM would lead the assault to overthrow such an absurd funding mechanism, and the organization would be perfectly justified for doing so. Nonetheless, isn't it strange how the hypothetical Michigan Bell funding scheme parallels PIRGIM's fun- ding proposal? One amazing fact is that PIRGIM is not requesting the change in funding because of a ground swell of student support. PIRGIM is in fact seaching for a more lucrative funding mechanism because student support for the organization is dwindling. As a matter of fact, PIRGIM's justification and see if you can notice any similarities. Yet if Detroit Edison were to justify a fundirig change in such terms, PIRGIM would be up In arms. Is there no limit to hypocrisy? It is possible, of. course, that even if PIRGIM realizes that its proposed "refusable fee" plan is at best thinly veiled conversion of the funds of unwitting students, PIRGIM workers will still be able to rationalize this In their minds. One can almost hear PIRGIM volunteers chirping "We are forced to rip-off students in order to protect them from being ripped-off by big business." This reminds me of the preverse logic of one American soldier during the Vietnamn : _ YIA , 1... :' M _ 119"110 ' ' ';' 1 I M IUM i ,' ! d:~