4 OPINION Pige 4 Wednesday, February 2, 1983 The Michigan Daily Reagan ratifies injustice in El Salvador By A. Hernandez Lozano Once again President Reagan has declared that the government of El Salvador is eligible to recieve further U.S. military and economic assistance based on it's "continued progress" in safeguarding the human rights of the Salvadoran people. The sad fact is that nothing could be further from the truth. Throughout 1982 the level of violence directed at the civilian population escalated. The Salvadoran Army, security forces, and other paramilitary groups conducted Vietnam-style scorched-earth military sweeps throughout the countryside, resulting in the indiscriminate killing of thousands. CLEARLY, THE intent of such a policy is nothing more than a calculated strategy by the junta to exterminate the rural civilian population. Each peasant is seen as a possible collaborator with those who have taken up ar- ms in order to defend themselves against the excesses of the dictatorship. By the time that the Salvadoran Army had completed it's offensive in Morazan Province, which took place from December 7-17 1981, 1,009 bodies were counted. Of those identified, 97 were children and infants, many of whom were burned alive in their hamlets while others were found with their throats cut. A survivor of the massacre stated that, "pleas for mercy were useless, as were the cries of mothers as they watched their children being forced to march in a single line to'their death." stead have chosen to give weapons and finan- cial assistence to those who have systematically resorted to terror, torture, and mass killings when their privileged position has been threatened. At this point I can only ask where is Reagan's sense of fairness and that "different standard of morality" that he claims to follow? It is totally unrealistic on Reagan's part to expect that there could be progress on the human rights question, especially when his own Assistant Secretary for Inter-American Affairs Thomas Enders, recently described the Salvadoran court system as being "non- functional." HIS STATEMENT merely confirms what the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States has been saying publicly for years; the illegal executions committed by the security forces and paramilitary organizations take place because these forces "act without punish- ment . . . with the acquiescence or tacit con- sent of the government." As for Reagan's contention that military aid to the junta is necessary to prevent it from being overthrown by foreign insurgents, this line of logic has no basis in fact. No proof of such intervention has ever been put forth by the administration because it simply does not exist. The Salvadoran people don't need the Soviets or the Cubans to enlighten them about what their course of action must be. For the past half century these people have known nothing but misery, terror, torture, and the in- discriminate killing of their loved ones at the hands of a series of ruthless military dictator- ships. The Salvadoran revolution is and remains nothing more than the insurrection of the people against a repressive and criminal dic- tatorship, and against the social, political, and economic system supporting such a gover- nment. The common people have embarked on this course of action because they have seen that it is impossible to transform anything by strictly peaceful methods and must now resort to force in order to destroy a regime which is contrary to their liberty, development, and welfare. We, as people who dearly cherish our freedom, can do no less than to strongly sup- port those less fortunate then ourselves in their righteous struggle to attain what we as a nation have always demanded: the right to life, liber- ty and the pursuit of happiness. To that end, the president should not forget the words of a rebel from another insurrection, Richard Henry Lee, as he stood before the First Continental Congress in 1776: "Let this happy day give birth to an American Republic. Let her rise not to devastate and to conquer, but to re-establish the reign of peace and of law, and to set up a new standard of freedom for all the peoples of the earth." Lozano is an Ann Arbor resident. The Salvadoran Army: Taking aim with U.S. supplied weapons. COULD THIS be the progress to which the president refers? The price that has been paid by the people of El Salvador for the "accomplishments" of the bloody regime the United States government so willingly supports is high. It constitutes a serious indictment of not only the dictatorship, but also of the Reagan administration for gran- ting military aid to a corrupt and criminal oligarchy that has repeatedly shown that it will stop at nothing to maintain it's privileged position in Salvadoran society. In El Salvador, justice, like security and op- portunity, is and continues to be the prerogative of the privileged few who are sup- ported by a U.S. trained and financed army that has become the bitter enemy of the com- mon people. Continued support for a gover- nment that brings upper class prosperity while pursuing a policy of degradation it's own people is nothing short of criminal. IN ESSENCE, the president has chosen to pursue a policy that ignores the most basic human rights of the Salvadoran people and in- eRdictbaun 4atlQ Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Wasserman Vol. XCIII, No. 101 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, M1 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Amateur arms controller L711 iT WON'T PAY;ITS BT? - e- 4 A NY HOPES harbored about Presi- dent Reagan's sincerity in pursuing arms control must have faded when he announced his choice to head the nation's arms control agency. Kenneth Adelman's scorn for past arms control efforts runs deeper than his knowledge on the subject, making him unfit to hold the post. As head of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Adelman would be ;responsible for coordinating and implementing all U.S. arms control policy - much different from his current tasks as deputy United Nations Ambassador. He would oversee strategic and European nuclear missile talks, as well as negotiations on conventional forces. Under vigorous questioning before theiSenate Foreign Relations Commit- tee; Adelman proved he was not chosen forthis expertise in any of these fields, but, for his ideological purity. He fits they Reagan mold perfectly. He has been a steadfast opponent of past arms control achievements - particularly the SALT II agreement - just like the president. Worse, Adelman was unable to provide sufficient answers for senators serious about arms control. Asked by one senator what he would do if the Soviets proposed to eliminate nuclear arms, Adelman replied he'd never thought of the idea. Are the Soviets cheating on current agreements, another senator asked. Again Adelman had no answer. Apparently, Adelman has limited knowledge of the ultimate purpose of arms control talks. With current U.S. disarmament policy in disarray and obvious high stakes involved, the nation cannot afford to have a top arms controller who only has a tenuous grasp of the subject and refuses to do the homework necessary to answer even basic questions. If the Senate confirms the president's nomination it will only stamp its ratification on the ad- ministration's already lethargic at- tempts at arms control. But if it is serious about its constitutional duty to screen presidential appointees, it will send Reagan looking for someone else. Adelman would be an amateur arms controller at best. K I GAST VV R 9 W09% SWRY TIMS A H ae;'' vl L fir 4 LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Daily misunderstands SNR protest 4i, "WE'VE GOT A BOLD NEW SOLUTION A PIFFERENT SLOGAN" . k 1 At ( z ., , ' ,; .., .. K ^ s j r . . 1'> i' l.' s i j t' "f ' f. ; ' y-. y.. v' \\\ .6 S /sP S t' : . _., , < . m ! ? / .1 i ,. To the Daily: Recently, the Daily has devoted a fair amount of atten- tion to efforts by School of Natural Resources students to avert the 33 percent budget cut recommended by the Budget Priorities Committee as part of the University's five year redirection plan. Unfortunately the reporting of events lacks a complete understanding of the issues and actions involved. Sunday's "Week in Review" section ("NR students: Revolutionary tactics," Daily, Jan. 30) demonstrated this ab- sence of understanding. We have stated exp'licitly that the diver- sion of our tuition is not meant to "topple" the University-the money is going into a University account. This action is a protest against the overall reallocation plan and the "review process" which we have been subjected to. We are protesting for several reasons. First, there are many problems with review commit- tee's work, on which the proposed cuts are supposedly based. Although the review was sup- posed to have been an open process, the committee has so far ignored input from students, faculty, and others. The committee's report is faulty and based on inaccurate information. This report doesn't substantiate its major recom- mendation-the proposed budget cuts. In the face of these and other charges, the committee remains silent, and Vice President for Academic Affairs Billy Frye ap- pears equally willing to ignore the charges. Furthermore, this review sets a bad precedent whereby studen- ts and faculty are given only the most cursory consideration in decisions determining their future. Due process has been cir- cumvented, and the whole University should take note. Unless vigorous protests are made, the School of Natural Resources is not likely to be the last school in the University to be treated in such a manner. Who's next? Finally, we feel that other students need to know what is happening. Through the tuition diversion and other upcoming events, we hope to make others on campus aware so "reallocation" can be turned around. The'Daily will do a great ser- vice to its readers if it thoroughly investigates the administration's actions and refrains from mud- dled editorializing. --Mike Manuel February 1 SCRAP attack misguided / ! I .,.u 1: .; s To the Daily: We resent Maura Johnston's uninformed attack on the Student Committee for Reform and Progress. We began our petition drive in response to students' strongly PwnrPCCnd centimaent aainst the If PIRGIM has the general student support it claims, one would assume that students would be flocking to sign their petitions. And one would assume that if our cause were without merit or student; support, as Tnhncnn ;v n n n .. ...27mlI Snow removal or art? (',, C To the Daily: I would just like to compliment the University's maintenance division for there prompt and ef-. Now if the University could perhaps take some of that money and put it into the art and educationnschools- thev might. ,s' "'L ~ J