100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 18, 1986 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1986-02-18

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4

OPINION

Page 4

Tuesday, February 18, 1986

The Michigan Daily

I

Eie tigan man
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

U.S. reacts inflexibly

Vol. XCVI, No.98

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board

Happy daze

ALTHOUGH the Cold War men-
tality proved to be damaging for
the U.S. in the 1950's, it is
resurging with renewed vigor in
the 1980's. During the '50's, one of
America's most famous civil liber-
ty attorneys, Joseph Rauh, defen-
ded Lillian Hellman when she
refused to identify other writers as
Communists during the McCarthy
era. Today, Rauh has a similar
case regarding the "communist
threat." He was recently hired to
represent nine Canadians who are
suing the C.I.A. for suffering ren-
dered when they were made the
unknowing subjects of brain-
washing experiments.
Throughout the 1940's, inspired
by early Cold War sentiment and
fear of Commmunist insurgency,
the CIA believed that the Soviets
and the Chinese had taken the lead
in mind control and brainwashing.
The CIA responded to this unfoun-
1ded fear by implementing a $25
million, 25-year-long program to
study behavioral control. The
project was called MKULTRA.
Under MKULTRA, money was
funnelled through a private foun-
dation to finance 149 research
projects at universities and other
institutions in the United States,
Canada, and some Western
European countries. Now, 30 years
later, the nine Canadians are suing
the CIA for $1 million each for
seriously disrupting their lives.
A highly respected Canadian
psychiatrist, Dr. Ewen Cameron,
prformed the experiments in the
late '50's and early 60's at the Allen
y Memorial Institute. Cameron used
LSD and massive electric shocks to
wipe out unwanted behaviors and
memories of his patients. Tape
M recorded messages, which he
referred to as "psychic driving,"
indoctrinated his subjects, creating
new behaviors and distorted self-
images. Finally, prolonged and
drug-induced sleep erased all
memory of the experience.
The victims initially went to the
Allen Memorial Institiute for a
variety of reasons. Two were suf-
fering from postpartum
depression; one was anxious, and
another had a physical complaint
that his doctor believed was
psychosomatic. A woman doctor

became a subject when she came in
for an interview to receive a
fellowship and was told she was too
nervous. Each subject paid exhor-
bitant fees for the ineffective
treatment, which had deleterious
effects: amnesia, anxiety,
depression, and inability to read,.
concentrate or keep a job.
None of the victims realized what
experiments had been carried out
on them until the '70's, when the
CIA released some of its records on
the experiments after a request
from author John Miller. Miller
used the Freedom of Information
Act in order to obtain the CIA
documents and to do research for
his book The Search for the Man-
churian Candidate. In 1973, acting
against its own regulations, the
CIA attempted to destroy the
records on MKULTRA. Only a
handful of documents survived.
Various television stations and
publications picked up the story,
and the nine Canadians recognized
the reason for their personality

By Michele Viswanathan
and Jeremy Firestone
Europeans hailed the surprising announ-
cement by Secretary Gorbachev of a
proposal for the elimination of nuclear
weapons as "sensational" and "courageous."
In sharp contrast, the Reagan Ad-
ministration approached the proposal with
"cautious curiosity," looking for ways to
turn it down. On February 11, the U.S. flatly
rejected the Soviet proposal for an
agreement barring the spread of chemical
weapons. Yet, oddly enough, the Ad-
ministration has failed to provide any sub-
stantive objections to the proposal.
The most intriguing aspect of the new
Gorbachev disarmament proposal is its ap-
proach to verification. Gorbachev has
agreed to verification going beyond
"national technical means" - satellite sur-
veillance - to on-site inspections, the
method demanded by Americans and
traditionally resisted by Soviets. Con-
sequently, the U.S. can no longer take
refuge in charges of Soviet cheating as an
obstacle to serious arms control
negotiations.
Mr. Gorbachev has also proposed to
eliminate Soviet and American medium-
range missiles in Europe without accoun-
ting for British and French missiles. THis
action represents a significant shift in the
policy of the Soviets who in the past have in-
sisted on keeping enough SS-20's to counter
the British and French arsenals. Moreover,
Gorbachev did not limit his demonstration
of good will to nuclear arms. He also
proposed negotiated reductions of both
Soviet and American conventional forces in
Europe. In light of the fact that the stock-
pile of nuclear armaments in the U.S.
already exceeds by many times the power
necessary to annihilate civilization, the
Administration's refusal to recognize the
good will explicit in the Soviet proposal and
to enter into bilateral arms control
negotiations is a travesty.

Some critics may argue that the Kremlin
has called for universal disarmament in
declarations which are nothing more than
propaganda exercises. Curiously, these
same people fail to notice that Reagan has
been grandly proposing a "space shield" to
deliver humanity from the terrible fear of
nuclear war. Propaganda? Perhaps, in
light of the enormous technological uncer-
tainties in building Star Wars, as the
Challenger tragedy has already revealed,
and the belief by most esperts that Star
Wars will only protect missiles and not
populations.
Tragically, the administration has relen-
tlessly pursued its Star Wars plan and
ignored Soviet calls for arms control
agreements without being forced to respond
to the issue of crisis stability. As the U.S.
pours billions of dollars into weapons
development under SDI, it undermines the
existing balance of nuclear forces in the
world. In the face of a dangerous build-up
by the U.S., other countries may resort to
pre-emptive strikes out of the feeling that
they have nothing left to lose.
Furthermore, it is startling that no one
has questioned Reagan's blatantly false
assertion that Star Wars involves "non-
nuclear technology." This assertion direc-
tly contradicts scientific facts that demon-
strate that nuclear explosions trigger the X-
ray lasers which form the crux of Star Wars
technology.
Although Star Wars has been termed a
"defensive system," it is quite clear that a
supposedly protective cosmic shield leads to
U.S. confidence that it can launch a first
strike attack and survive retalitory
measures. While Reagan claims that Star
Wars technology will be shared with all
nations, it seems highly unlikely that the
U.S. will share its "defense system" with
the not-to-be-trusted Soviets.
Gorbachev has also extended the Sobiet
unilateral moratorium on nuclear testing
(initially from Aug. 6, 1985 - Jan. 1, 1986) for
another 90 days. As a ban on testing new
weapons could lead to genuine arms reduc-
tions, why does the Administration flatly
reject the opportunity? The Administration
first claimed that Moscow broke the last test
moratorium in 1961. False. Eisenhower en-
ded the 1958 moratorium. The Ad-
ministration has also charged that the

Soviets conducted a sport of testing imme-
diately before declaring the moratorium
thus gaining an advantage over the U.S. But
the U.S., with 765 tests, has a considerable
lead over the Soviet Union's 564.
Why does the Administration doggedly
pursue an expensive space shield which
threatens to upset the balance of nuclear
forces in the world? Moreover, why does
the government refuse to commence talks
with Moscow despite the new Soviet
flexibility on traditional stumbling blocks?
Perhaps an examination of the enourmous
campaign contributions of defense contrac-
tors wil provide an answer. In the past six
years, armsmakers' campaign con-
tributions to members of the House and
Senate Armed Services Committees and
Appropriations Defense subcommittees
have reached $5.3 million. As Reagan began
his arms build-up, the Political Action
Committees (PACs) of the 20 largerst
military contractors increased their cam-
paign gifts by 225 percent. Little wonder
that the government has stuck so
tenaciously to the Star Wars project. After
all, for all those millions of dollars, the
military-industrial complex usually wants
something other than good government.
But perhaps even this crude economic
analysis falls short of the underlying reason
behind the administration's deep commit-
ment to the arms race. It is clear that U.S.
military superiority is essential to insure
that American intervention in foreign coun-
tries can be carried out with impunity under
the American "nuclear umbrella." The
U.S. needs the Star Wars fantasy not to
protect the people but to maintain a suf-
ficiently intimidating posture so that
American policies of intervention and sub-
version of foreign governments can be
carried out without undue concern. Yet
those who favor an imperialistic stance by
the U.S., clothed in the euphemism of "ac-
ting in our self-interest," forget one thing:
there has never been a weapon in human
history which has not been used. And like it
or not, their chances of survival in a nuclear
holocaust are no better than ours.
The National Lawyers Guild and the
Lawyers Alliance for Nuclear Arms Control
are sponsoring a rally for arms control on
February 18 from 4-7 p.m. at the Federal
Building on Liberty at Fifth.

changes
distress.
(2/9/82)

and severe mental
Detroit Free Press,

Viswanathan and Firestone
the National Lawyers Guild.

represent

The purpose of the CIA ex-
periments was ultimately to learn
how to crack the mental defenses of
enemy agents, and to enable spies
and other soldiers to carry out
dangerous missions and special
assignments against their will.
Success would have given the CIA
unlimited powers.
The Canadians' grievance again-
st the CIA looks like the proverbial
'tip of the iceberg.' The Allen In-
stitute alone used at least one hun-
dred human guinea pigs. Since
several other American and
European institutions also received
money from MKULTRA, the
possibility exists for widespread
abuse. Because of the covert
nature of the CIA, it is uncertain
whether the full extent of the
damage will ever come to light.
It is clear that the Cold War bred
an irrational fanaticism that does
not belong in any government
policy. When the trial starts, more
evidence will surely come out on
MKULTRA which will attest to the
horror and insanity of the con-
tinuing Cold War mentality.

Chassy
.
{

__ 1

4

' 'I.
o .i.
'I,
1111
j.iI
, (
Ii ,
. - i

A5 Thf NATiv S
TovWoPS IP T$El 6OD
I JlL~JTVAL1JVO
--0
+ i1\ ' h' t
ri (U1
4 A ~ MAU
OI N M INK

UGLi no more

: -.G *
.: ; : '

ki V ui

THE ADMINISTRATION'S ten-
tative decision to put a lounge
in the UGLi is a commendable
response to student concerns. The
area where the newspapers and
xeroxing machines are will be
transformed to have chairs and
vending machines, perhaps as
early as next fall.
Before the University installed
computers in the UGLi in 1984,
students had a lounge in which to
relax and refresh themselves. The
lounge made it unnecessary to go

quo in the UGLi.
In addition to safety, there are a
number of good reasons to support
the lounge. First, short of martial
law, it would be impossible to
regulate all aspects of student life
so that all students could study
peacefully at home or in the
library, especially since the
housing situation is overcrowded.
Since there are so many students
studying at the UGLi, it is not sur-
prising that many talk to each
other and disrupt studies. Even
students who do "research" at a

LETTERS:
Mandela deserves honorary degree

To the Daily:
Nineteen-sixty was a turning
point for the ANC, the resistance
movement, and Nelson Mandela.
That year, in Sharpesville, on
March 21st, police opened fire
on a group of unarmed, peaceful
protestors, killing 67 and woun-
ding nearly 200. Most, many of
them children and their mothers,
were shot in the back as they
tried to flee. Nationwide protests
hskP-1,, .,a idthe n.reivr anmrn-

the Nobel Peace Prize and one-
time president of the ANC, said
at the 1964 trial in which Nelson
Mandela and 7 other ANC leaders
were sentenced to life imprison-
ment, "...in the face of the un-
compromising white refusal to
abandon a policy which denies
the African and other oppressed
South Africans their rightful
heritage-freedom-no one can
blame brave, just men for
onn-r cr ..notnn ..y - nc o

to remain in the Transkei
homeland. Each time he has
refused, responding that the
South African regime must first
renounce violence, dismantle
apartheid, and free all political
prisoners.
During his trial he said, "I have
fought against white domination
and... black domination. I have
cherished the ideal of a
democratic and free society in
...,. h nh all - n n n . .i ves*n im .:.,i

eloquently and inspiring others to
accomplish deeds they onc
imagined impossible.
White supremacists in South
Africa fear Nelson Mandela and
what he symbolizes. In South
Africa it is illegal to print his pic-
ture or to print and discuss his
ideas. Nevertheless, his presence
continues to cast a shadow over
Apartheid that each day grows
longer and darker. By honoring
Nelson Mandela with a

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan