0 OPINION Page 4 Monday, September 14, 1987 The Michigan Daily 41 Conservative speaks on Eritrea This is the second of a two-part series. The other part was in the September 10th issue of the Daily. For this dialogue, Daily editor Henry Park interviewed spokesperson Scott Hughes of the Conservative Action Foundation (1-800-423-7976) and Dr. Tesfai Ghermazien, Deputy Representative of the Eritrean Peoples' Liberation Front (EPLF) in the United States, PO Box ;65685, Washington, DC 20035 (202) 234-9282. Daily: I just talked with the EPLF representative in Washington, and what they told me was that the government they ,are trying to establish is called an 'Eritrean Peoples' Government." They believe in free elections, free speech, free writing, private economy; they allow foreign investment. So my question comes back to you, does a group fighting the Soviet Union (They also claim that they are the group that has dealt the Soviet Union the biggest blows in the world.), does a group have to be pro-U.S. before your group would support them? C A F: No, not necessarily. I don't believe that ought to be a criterion set in stone. I would think the fact that an indigenous anti-communist group wanted to free their country from communist- backed proxies of the Soviet Union would be cause in and of itself to aid those people. All that we request - the CAF - is that the type of government they favor upon overthrowing the Marxist state would be democratic in nature. They don't necessarily have to have a pro-U.S. tilt. I think the pattern you are seeing in Ethiopia is really genocide and it doesn't vary that much from what the Soviets are doing in Afghani-stan. Daily: Do you know of any conservative groups that support the Eritrean or Tigra- yan struggles? CAF: Not that I know of here in DC. Daily: Do you think that the phrase "Soviet imperialism" is appropriate? CAF: Oh, indeed. In fact, if you look around the world, Soviet imperialism, it's not fantasy. It's reality. We see it every day. During the '70s especially, under unfortunately, the administration of Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, we saw no fewer than 7 or 8 countries fall to communism throughout the Third World. And that was a direct result of America being unwilling to aid those governments or pro- democratic forces who were trying to keep their nations from literally being overrun by pro-Moscow, pro-Cuban military forces. Daily: Do you see China as imperialist too? C A F : At this point, no. Notwithstanding its communist orientation. I think there are dangers. I think it's somewhere where we have to keep a close eye on, but at this point with Deng Xiaoping in power, they're primarily concerned with getting Western investments and technological goods and I don't think they would dare do anything at this time to jeopardize getting that aid from the West. In contrast to their active and very open support for Third World liberation movements during the '60s, they've really kind of backed off from that now. They're really more interested in playing an elder statesman role in Southeast Asia. In fact, they are one of the leading countries trying to put a block on aid going to communist Vietnam. So in many respects, they're actually trying to help out some of the democratic countries in the world. I think they're aware of the Soviet threat in the South Pacific and they're working together with the United States to stop that threat. I would not view them as imperialist. Daily: Maybe you should just list all the countries you consider to be imperialist. C A F: I would say the following countries are Third World proxies for the Soviets, which they use literally as mercenaries around the world where it would be politically impossible for the Soviets to be there. For example, there has been a great deal of talk lately that North Korean forces will replace Cuban mercenaries in Africa. In addition to that there are a number of countries in the Islamic world which play host to Soviet interests - among them Libya, Syria, Iran to some extent. I would say the Vietnamese have been very active communist allies of the Soviets, wreaking mayhem and subversion around the world. In fact, documentation that I've seen has been that a lot of the military weaponry that the Sandinistas are receiving is coming right from Vietnam. It's actual American surplus material captured by the Vietnamese during the Vietnam War, which has been shipped via Cuba on to the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. So yah, I would agree that there are a number of countries that the Soviets utilize to accomplish their foreign policy aims, among them the Vietnamese, the North Koreans, but most importantly at the top of that list you would have to set the Cubans. Daily: The word "imperialism" originally ap-plied to Western countries. What do you have to say about that. CAF: That's unfortunate. I think we all recognize to some extent that a lot of the Western powers, many, many years ago were colonialist in nature. We're not trying to apologize for the acts they committed around the world. But in the modern day, beginning in 1917 with the Bolshevik seizure of power, imperialism has become much more known as something that the Soviets have become involved in. I think that on the whole, Western democracies are not angels; however, they do subscribe to political beliefs, which are by and large democratic in nature. The Soviets on the other hand have stated repeatedly that they do not want democracy. They want to push the revolution throughout the world. It's interesting to note, formerly, the Soviet Union supported Somalia. However, they saw that Ethiopia was a bigger prize and when Mengistu came into power, they quickly switched alliances; They withdrew their support from Somalia and granted it to Ethiopia because obviously Ethiopia is a stronger country, richer resource-wise and it's got greater access to the Red Sea. It's also in a position, by it's position in Africa, and it's the largest nation, to influence the revolutionary movements on many of its borders. It's another example of the Soviets' using whatever they can to advance the communist cause. Daily: Can you name any groups that you support which don't have a pro-U.S. foreign policy stance? CAF: We support Prince Sihanouk [in Kampuchea, now called Cambodia - ed.], not CAF itself, but the United States, but to the best of my knowledge they are, if not pro-U.S., then pro-Western. Offhand, I can't think of any group in the world that we support that is not pro- U.S. I guess I would make the point that the Afghan rebels, the type of government they would favor would be democratic, but it's not anything like we would associate a Jeffersonian-type democracy with. It's not going to be the equivalent of the United States. Their own culture would preclude that. They're very tribal-oriented. Yes, we do support the Afghani rebels. But they're not going to have a replica of U.S.-style democracy. They're probably more factional, trying to work out an agreement where each tribe gets a slice of the power. There are approximately 7 or so groups that make up the freedom- fighters. They're not' necessarily pro-U.S., but they do look to the United States and indeed Western Europe and the rest of the free world as the body to give them arms. Other than that though, around the world, I really can't think of another commonly known freedom-fighter group which is anti-U.S., which is being provided with aid. For the most part, all of the groups in the world who are fighting against the communist govern- ments are pro-Western. t w lidcigan aiIy Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan , Vol. XCVIII, No. 3 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Say it ain't so, Joe If a student did not feel like writing a paper for a class and decided to pjx1giarize something, he or she would probably be in serious trouble. The student would face disciplinary action possibly inpluding expulsion. The quality of hdie student's previous work Wouldn't make a bit of difference. g Also, the intent behind handing in a plagiarized paper would be 'rrelevant. It wouldn't matter if all ie books in the library had been bglued shut, the pages in the 'ecessary periodicals were not to be Fpund, or large guard dogs were ,reventing a particular student from entering the Grad. In our society, .'articularly at the University, no -excuses exist for this type of blatant dishonesty. Senator Joseph Biden (D-Del.) obviously thinks more should be expected from students than from a ,residential candidate. Recently, while on the 'residential campaign trail, Biden borrowed language from the y speeches of English Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock without giving : due credit. The New York Times recently pointed out that Biden used Kinnock's language, almost verbatim, in his closing remarks at a ,,debate at the Iowa State Fair, and had said the ideas had come to him spontaneously on his way to the debate. Aides, while acknowledging that Biden had failed to credit Kinnock during the debate, claimed the ,failure to be inadvertent-nurelv the result of time constraints, and denied any attempt to deceive. Politicians often try to imitate the styles and appearances of other successful politicians. For example, it is no coincidence that Gary Hart's mannerisms resembled that of John Kennedy, or that President Ronald Reagan often invokes a phrase coined by President Truman, "The buck stops here." Though imitation can be the sincerest form of flattery, Biden clearly overstepped the line by claiming that the speech was his own thoughts-calling them "off the cuff remarks." If Biden continues in this manner, he may end up imitating Kinnock's pathetic showing in last summer's British parliamentary elections. Biden's actions, however, in and of themselves, should not lead voters to reject his candidacy. The life of a presidential candidate can be extremely hectic and the candidates often have to give several speeches per day. Gaffes and miscues are expected from presidential candidates and, within limits, are excusable. But then again, the lives of students can also be reasonably hectic. While most students do not have multiple speeches to give, they do have papers to write, extra- curricular activities to attend, and a social life to maintain. Based on Biden's precedent, the next time a student hands in a plagiarized paper, perhaps he or she can tell the professor it contains a few "off the cuff remarks." Eritrea By Henry Park Eritrea is a country with a recent history that belies the propaganda of both the Eastern bloc led by the Soviet Union and the Western bloc led by the United States. Eritrea has faced colonization by successive pro-U.S. and pro-Soviet Ethiopian regimes and both the Soviet Union and the United States oppose the current Eritrean effort to free Eritrea from Ethiopian colonialism. Equating pro-Western with pro- democratic, the United States only supports anti-Soviet rebels who are pro- U.S. How the EPLF is less democratic than the contras is hard to imagine unless "democracy" is just the camouflage of U.S. imperialism. Then it becomes very clear. The contras would set up a U.S. neo-colony in Nicaragua. The Eritreans want genuine self-determination. The Eritrean People's Liberation Front (EPLF) has learned from hard experience that the United States does not support "freedom-fighters" unless those "freedom fighters" are good pawns capable of fighting for U.S. ruling class interests. Nor is the Soviet Union the "natural ally" of Third World countries against imperialist aggression. The example of Eritrea pierces the rhetoric of both superpowers because both superpowers would prefer an intact Ethiopia as an ally, proxy and neo-colony. At the present, neither the United States nor the Soviet Union will settle for influence in Eritrea, if such influence is to be had. The very real international media silence on this armed struggle that has lasted over 25 years is in no small part caused by the fact that neither the imperialist West nor the social-imperialist East (with the meaning socialism in words, imperialism in deeds) can make any political hay out of Eritrea. Neither side has anything to gain from drawing attention to its role in Eritrea. The nationalist reticence of the Eritrean People's Libera-tion Front is understandable given Eritrea's experience with Italian, British, American and Soviet imperialisms. Yet, it too contributes to the silence on Eritrea. The EPLF does not like to make pronouncements on international issues since it does not want to alienate any international actor that might come to support the EPLF's principal goal of national liberaton. This SAUDI ARABIA suoaN \ SUDAN YEMEN d ETHIOPIA KENYA ' I I vs. superpowers- may also help explain why it does not receive much international media attention. Perhaps the EPLF is hoping either or both of the superpowers will support the EPLF some day if the EPLF does not make aggressive denunciations of the two imperialisms. If Eritrea should fall into either the Eastern or Western orbit at some point, that would not change the fact that there was once a nationalist movement openly opposed by both blocs. w ,.r..4 r i - ~