4 OPINION Page 4 Wednesday, October 20, 1982- The Michigan Daily Fall fashion: Protesting military research (I - By Peter Ford The fall fashions have come to the University of Michigan. Once again, it is vogue to con- demn all forms of military research on our campus. Yet as I listen to these students and other concerned persons voice their fears. I detect oie similar concept in all their arguments: ignorance. Those protesting military research at the University do not seem to have a general ,nderstanding of U.S. military policy or .trategy. They do not-or cannot-perceive the relationship between high-technology research -and the nature and objectives of our military ,frces. But before they can argue this issue, .they must have a better understanding of all .the implications of military research in order to arrive at intelligent, rational conclusions. * THE PRIMARY purpose of all U.S. military forces is deterrence. This simply involves ,4eterring any potential adversary from .initiating armed conflict. History (through such events as the Cuban missle crisis and the Berlin blockade) proves we should possess a force with the capability (not to be confused with intention) to successfully engage a poten- tial aggressor on any level of conflict, should deterrence fail. History also indicates that civilian leaders must possess the willingness to use that force, should an aggressor initiate con- flict. Unfortunately, maintaining a credible level of deterrence is quite difficult. Once an adver- sary gains any edge in technolocy, develop- ment, or deployment of a weapons system, it is very easy for them to translate that gain into a more aggressive and expansionist foreign policy. The consequences of such shifts in power relationships are quite frightening: world instability, economic chaos, internal discontent, and-worst of all-armed conflict. It is these consequences which fuel the military's legitimate interest in high- technology research. In our society, most private corporations are driven by profit, not necessarily by the needs of our people or country. They are not always willing to conduct basic, high-technology research, unless there is immediate profit potential. YET THE military, in its need to maintain a capable level of deterrence, is more willing to invest into "bold new horizons" of technology. That is why a sizeable portion of high- technology research is partly funded by the military, or has some military applications. Since almost half of basic research is conduc- ted on college campuses, it is only logical that some of this research be conducted at a quality university such as ours. Being approached to perform any research is a compliment to a university, not an evil. The opponents of military research on cam- pus reveal their ignorance when they suggest that such research has no benefit to society. Once the military has proven these new example) was partly funded through military research. Most importantly, new technologies developed for the military free man from per- forming menial, repetitous tasks, and allow us. to pursue those activities and ideals which truly make us human. These are but a few of the many positive aspects of military research, and these alone far outweigh whatever negative ones exist. As a member of the Michigan Student Assembly, I have read Bret Eynon's report on military research on our campus. For someone who supposedly did so much work, it is surprising how his report a) was only 22 pages in length, b) did not find any violations in the University's research policy (which is itself vague), and c) was composed mostly of quotes from books and pamphlets. Personally, I have submitted lab reports (Aero 301) which were longer than 22 pages; not only were they due in two weeks (as opposed to a year), but I did not get paid for it with your MSA dollars. This year, the assembly voted to spend an additional $2,100 of the students' money to do the same thing. Finally, there are those who declare military research as immoral and unethical. Is there anything more moral, ethical, or Christian than sacrificing your time, energy, or possibly your life to defend your country and those you love? I can think of nothing else. Ford is a senior in aerospace engineering and a member of the Michigan Student Assembly. Protesting military research: Is ignprance the common theme? avenues of technology sound and workable, private firms then apply this technology towards the production of consumer goods and services. These private firms enrich society by providing new consumer goods, and they enrich themselves by generating profits. THE INITIAL technology behind high-speed calculators, home computers, quieter, fuel- efficient jet engines, and lightweight composite materials (in lightweight tennis racquets, for _ -------- __ ................ Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Stewart i E Vol. XCIII, No. 36 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Consistently convoluted YOU'VE HEARD the one about the dog biting the hand that feeds? Well, here's Reagan's newest twist on that old saying-the United States is ready to feed the hand it bites. The president has been snarling and growling.all year when it comes to put- ting trade sanctions on the Soviets for interference in Poland and to chastising Europeans for working on the pipeline. But although ferocious on technological trade, the president is pulling in his claws on agricultural trade. He's offered, in fact, to sell the Russians all the grain they want, and he's promised not to renege on the deal for at least six months. Is this hope that the president has made a new ideological commitment to the principles of free trade? Hardly. Meagan's move is a political expedien- ry-a few grain sales equal a few farm votes. The promise not to back out on the grain deal applies only to sales made through November-the magical month when ballot boxes are in bloom. ZBut Reagan is doing much more with the grain sale than a little politicking. He is simultaneously adding fresh con- fusion to an already contradictory policy on trade and weakening relations with the Western alliance. Europeans have rightly griped that while the administration harshly demands European cooperation on trade sanctions, U.S. policy has no teeth when American profits are on the line. This double standard has been particularly insulting to the Europeans, and thus particularly ef- ficient at making Western relations deteriorate. Show a little consistency, European allies demand; stop hypocritically harping on the pipeline and go ahead and sell your damn grain. Reagan, however, already has been consistent. He has consistently made trade policy subservient to political goals, con- voluted and corrupted trade policy, and pushed , Europe w toward alienation-an astoundingly good job of bungling a major area of foreign policy. LETTERS TO THE DAILY: The Daily: Voice of the apathetic tI'' c '1 k " 6y' ! I' , X f , , ' --,( - . / ' ' / ;,r ! _ - ---- _ - - To the Daily: As one of the numerous ac- tivists on this campus, I was ap- palled at your coverage of last Thursday's events surrounding the Regents' meeting, as well as your general coverage of ac- tivism on this campus. Activism isn't dead, but the Daily seems to wish it were. Why is it that the Daily said "the students lost their first battle," concerning the "disappointingly small ... crowd" at the rally, but The Ann Arbor News mentions "the presence of large numbers of students" which forced the Regents to move their meeting. The Daily failed to mention that 25 percent of the people at the public comments time stayed afterwards for a meeting about what to do next. A reporter was Disbano To the Daily: In the story about graduate student apathy to Rackham Student Government elections (Daily, Oct. 14), Gene Goldfield was quoted as saying he didn't vote "because the administration ..- - __,L.. 4_..F l-1, there-but this important follow- up was ignored. Since this meeting, students are acting around the issues raised. This meeting was far more important than the public comments. Things are being done, studen- ts will have their say. Why does the Daily continually downplay the extent of student involvement in campus politics? The Daily should be en- couraging students to participate in the processes that affect their lives, not make them pessimistic and apathetic about campus issues. Just because there aren't rallies the size of the ones in the sixties (when Tom Hayden was editor of the Daily) does not mean issues are not being seriously and extensively ad- !RSG This year's election proves again that the Rackham Student Government is a sham and should be disbanded. Graduate students at the University ap- parently do not need advocates with the graduate, school ad- ministration or with the housing dressed. The Daily seems to feel that students are so conservative that the editors should cater to the views of the University ad- ministration. Many students get their im- pressions of University activities through your paper. It is impor- tant that you encourage student participation. Also, as a member of the Senate Assembly Research Policies Committee looking into military research, I must say your joking about defense depar- tment sponsored research in your editorial on Sunday was totally inexcusable. Designing weapons systems is no laughing matter. This research does exist, and if the Daily feels the people looking into this issue aren't presenting the Daily with enough printable material, maybe the Daily should do some of its own work. Stop un- dermining the work of those of us who are working hard to make this campus a better place with your irresponsible journalism. You should be a voice of the con- cerned students, but instead you are a voice for the apathetic that are sitting by and letting this University go to hell. -Tom Marx October 18 i E PIR GIMplan-unfair III -, ___ a 7 1 To the Daily: Complaints are often sounded about the role of special interest groups in government. It is said that many levels of American government are subject to the in- fluence of powerful lobbies. Our Michigan Student Assem- bly is no exception. PIRGIM has succeeded in convincing the MSA to approve a plan whereby students will be charged $2 per term on their hill sto ,mnr. interest group, should have the exclusive right to appear on the student verification form (SVF) at all? This gives PIRGIM an un- fair advantage over the othet organizations which are also struggling to obtain funds. If PIRGIM can get its refusable-refundable funding plan approved, can any other group claim the right to use the University billing system for fund raising? 7- ,1 S'} 4- I A III ~U\ \