4 OPINION Page 4 Thursday, October 1, 1987 The Michigan Daily &. Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Vol. XCVIII, No. 16 420 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. S.Africa sanctio V Time to build a dorm t WITH 112 PERCENT occupancy in University residence halls this year, and similar figures in years past, terms like "converted triple" have become familiar parts of the student lexicon. Not only are three people living in many rooms designed for two, but some have l i v e d temporarily in lounges. Overcrowding seems to have become the usual state of affairs in the University's housing system. Adjusting to dormitory life is difficult enough, especially for first- year students, without having to live in cramped, overcrowded rooms. This University has the resources to facilitate students' development both intellectually and socially; yet, such development is undoubtedly hindered if students are not adequately housed. When queried as to why the oc- cupancy rate is so high, Housing Division officials reply that projections supplied by the Admissions Office were inaccurate, and more students returned to the residence halls than were anticipated. But Director o f Housing Information Leroy Williams further states that there are always more residents than originally planned for. If the occupancy projections are always too low, then the all too obvious solution is to revise the formula from which they are *-calculated. Yet, apparently, this has .ot been done. Certainly Housing r1ivision officials have recognized :the problem, so there is little choice wbut to conclude that the continued Avercrowding is driven either by inordinately bad planning or, more Earthfest n( EARTHFEST, THE INTERNATIONAL ecological extravaganza, sponsored y Greenpeace, the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA), the School of Natural Resources, and a SANE Against Nuclear Weapons 'ook place last weekend. Through poor publicity and an inadequate vdistribution of information, the worthwhile Earthfest was rendered ineffective since its message did not reach most of the student, or for that matter, Ann Arbor, population. The Earth Festival '87 tried to bring together environmental acti- vists and scholars with students and anyone else interested in order to promote an awareness of ecological and societal concerns. Lectures and workshops presented topics such as "Student Movements and Social Change," or "Building Multi- l Cultural Alliances." The Earthfest also called for more responsibility on behalf of protecting the planet from toxic wastes and exploitation of natural resources. Efforts of this kind are sorely needed and much appreciated. Unfortunately, the Earthfest pub- licity campaign left much to be "desired. The most conspicuous banner announcing the impending Earthfest hung by the Diag. It did not give a specific time or place to meet, successfully preventing casu- al sky-ward gazers from attending without doing some investigative work. Apathy being a major afflic- tion on this campus, students cannot be counted on to go out of th.er a t fnd te timand naace likely, the need for excess revenue. Placing a third person in a double room, for example, costs the University very little and brings in that lease as virtually pure profit. Multiply the cost of the lease by the 402 converted triples in South Quad, and the motivation for overcrowding the residence halls becomes clear. Money talks. Expediencies such as increased revenue do not, however, excuse the University from its essential responsibility to the students and that responsibility includes providing adequate housing. Since the private housing market in Ann Arbor is already nearly completely saturated, the only viable alternative is the construction of a new residence hall. The number of students now crammed into converted triples alone is enough to justify the building of a new residence hall. No increase in enrollment, though increasing enrollments seems to be the trend, would be needed. When confronted with the need for a new residence hall, University officials cite the prohibitive cost of such a project. This plea of financial impossibility, however, seems rather implausible in the shadow of the LSA's new multi- million dollar chemistry building. Undoubtedly a new chemistry building is important, but at least as important to the University's mission is the need to adequately house students. Perhaps the money the University has been making from all of those converted triples could be returned to the students in the form of a new residence hall. By Sean Jackson In June 1986 I wrote Senators Bradley and Lautenberg of my home state of New Jersey and urged them to support sanctions against the South African government. But after a month's travel in southern Africa this summer, including a visit to Johannesburg, I wish I had resisted the popular stampede and opposed the im- position of sanctions. Yes, I am now anti-sanctions. But I am still adamantly anti-apartheid. It is poss- ible, and I believe right, to support involvement in South Africa and still oppose apartheid. The South African crisis is a complex problem with no simple, yes-no, black-white answer. But one definitive point in my mind is this: at this stage sanctions is a non-policy; it is an easy way out for an America that does not want to grapple with the frustrations and complexities of South Africa and would rather take a "moral stand" that accomplishes little than struggle to bring real change to a troubled land. Sanctions is a non-policy for a couple reasons. First, while doing little defini- tive economic damage, U.S. sanctions has effectively removed the United States government from any position of in- fluence. Sanctions has increased the outflow of capital from South Africa, as Gerhard de Kock, South Africa's Federal Reserve chief admits. But buoyant gold prices have brought just as much, and potentially more, capital back into South Africa, and three percent economic growth is expected this year. After some years sanctions will undoubtedly constrain the South African economy, but wasn't the whole strategy behind sanctions to spur the South African regime to action now? The only tangible result of a sanctions policy has been the loss of any U.S. influence on the Botha regime. Granted, under the Reagan administration and its toothless constructive engagement policy, such influence was only at the margins. This policy has not failed, though; but rather, to paraphrase George Bernard Shaw, the only thing wrong with constructive engagement is it has never been tried. A president who earnestly pursued and genuinely sought change in South Africa could make a constructive engagement policy a reality. But so far sanctions has. only succeeded in removing the United States from an active role of influence in South Africa. More importantly, the Botha regime or its successor will most likely refuse to listen to the United States in the future, regardless of how committed Sean Jackson is a former Daily reporter. the next president is to bringing change in South Africa. The second problem with sanctions is more fundamental: what does it hope to accomplish and more importantly, how. Reform is the obvious goal, but sanctions may not be a realistic way to promote peaceful change. South Africa could sur- vive any attempt of international boycott given its resources, industrial power, and the likelihood that some nations will agree to trade. The first to suffer from exten- sive, multi-national sanctions would be the frontline states, whose economic survival depends on a steady flow of food, oil, and building materials from South Africa. True, extensive sanctions might cause the cracks in the ruling class philosophy to widen and make change possible. But there is just as good a chance that the Afrikaner's traditional siege mentality, of standing united in adversity, could prevail. In the face of such intransigence, bloody revolution seems to be the only outcome. The strong support for the Botha regime in the spring elections showed such resolve in the face of international pressure. To some, reform is not even a viable option. The leaders of a black student group, similar to the Black Student Union, who I met with at the University of Witwatersand in Johannesburg, see peaceful change as very unlikely. Sanc- tions, they argued, must be used to isolate South Africa to such an extent that the economic system collapses. They do not believe capitalism can operate without apartheid, and to get rid of the latter the existing economic system must go. They offered the socialist model as a successor. As a convinced believer in the capitalist economic system, with its plusses and minuses, I cannot support an alternative that seeks its dissolution to socialism. And if that is the sanction-supporters' end, then I certainly cannot support their means. For Americans I think the challenge is this: how can political equality f6r all South Africans be achieved while maintaining the vitality of South Africa's economy, the strongest on the continent. A constructive engagement policy dog- gedly pursued may help produce an answer. A president who makes the dissolution of apartheid an issue of personal concern, who makes it a high profile issue, and who conimits the global influence of the United States to bringing change is the first step towards an effective and earnest constructive engagement policy. A president who made majority rule in South Africa a personal crusade, as Richard rs fai Nixon made the rapproachement with China and as Jimmy Carter sought peace in the Middle East, could focus world attention on solving the problem. Such a president could propose to mediate, to start negotiations - or whatever it takes to get dialogue going. The president could personally appeal to other leaders all over the globe to join that effort, and a core of united nations, seeking a peaceful transi- tion of power that would assure the rights of all South Africans might make the difference. The unknown in all this is whether, given the chance of a workable plan to share power that would guarantee the rights of the individual, would white South Africans and the government support it? There is a solid core of dissatisfaction and dissent among white South Africans. But there is also great fear that majority rule will result in government take over of all private wealth and a rampage against whites. Peaceful change will have a chance if a genuine provision that this will not happen is made. The bitterness and anger of black South Africans could understand- ably make such a guarantee hard to swallow. But the reality of South Africa is that peaceful change could be achieved if such an offer was assured. With Ronald Reagan in office for another fifteen months, a president who would make South Africa a serious concern is at least that far away. In the meantime other action can be demanded of the Reagan administration and Botha regime. Call for the release of moderate black leaders from prison and urge American officials to meet with black representatives of South Africa's true majority. While we may not agree with their policies, we can at least listen. Also, push for economic aid to the frontline states so they can become somewhat economically independent of South Africa and weather the economic instability that is.likely to follow a major shift of power there. We hear very little about South Africa these days. No one talks about it on television or the editorial pages; I haven't seen any campus rallies. The attitude seems to be that we.have taken our stand; there is nothing more to do. But the' reality is apartheid continues and the United States has no way to bring its end any closer. If we Americans are not a hysteric people who only act because of media hype, then -let us show it by approaching complex problems like South Africa in a pragmatic way and taking the time to understand the complexity of the situation. Electing a president who emu- lates this ideal would certainly be a reasonable start. :t publicized Earthfest publicity campaign was also with the content of what few posters and banners were put up. Almost all indications in the banner led one to believe that the Earthfest dealt only with saving the ecosystem. This, however, was not Earthfest's only concern. It also expanded its scope and intended to make people aware of issues involving women, racism, Native Americans, nuclear disarmament, and a host of other things. The Earthfest flyers misinformed people about what really was going on. The campus' largest environ- mental awareness group, the Public Interest Group in Michigan (PIRGIM), did not participate, though not because it was mis- informed; it was obvious the Earthfest dealt with environmental concerns. Rather, at about the same time MSA sent invitations to participate in the Earthfest last spring, the newly elected MSA leaders turned against PIRGIM on the money appropriation voted for in a student referendum. MSA's internal squabblings certainly did not encourage PIRGIM to parti- cipate; although, one can only speculate what the real reasons were for PIRGIM's non-participation. Whether PIRGIM could have mobilized an effective publicity campaign for Earthfest as it did last winter during student elections, is a useless question. PIRGIM didn't show up, and the Earthfest was a publicity disaster. Hopefully next year there will be an Earthfest as LETTERS: Men: put yourself i women s shoes To the Daily: I'm writing in response to the letter entitled: "Defendant is victimized in rape trial" (Daily, 9/30/87). I have some ques- tions for the writer of this letter, Mr. Tim Gresla. If you were raped, would have the courage to try and prosecute the rapist? Would it ever occur to you, if you had not been raped to try to prosecute some- one just to slander his name? Let's suppose for a minute that you, Tim Gresla, have been raped. And, after a good deal of serious thought you decide to try and prosecute the rapist. During the trial it is established that you have suffered two tears in your rec- tum wall. But the defense suggests that it is entirely possible that these injuries happened prior to the rape. What would you think? How would you feel?. It is impossible for me to believe that anyone would cry rape for the sake of slander. It is equally impossible for me to believe that a woman would Stop litter To the Daily: Ann Arbor has a littering problem. On Tuesday, Sep- tember 29, it rained most of the want to have sex if she had tears in her vaginal wall. I know that we live in a society where a person is pre- MSA -:PIRGII To the Daily: I would like to respond to the MSA's decision to support PIRGIM funding. I think this is an outrage. The MSA does not have the right to decide what organizations the student body should support. What will keep other perhaps more controversial, organizations from obtaining the same type of student-wide funding? I sumed innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, I also know we live in a society that has not yet come to terms with the fact that acquaintance rape is a serious problem that needs to be reckoned with. -J. Baker September 30 does not deserve money 4 realize that I can get m y seventy-five or so cents back, but it is a hassle and a waste of my time to do this for such a nominal fee. But if everyone thinks that way PIRGIM will get a lot of money! I have donated to PIRGIM in the past because I wanted to support their current activities, not because the MSA has stepped outside its bounds as a student governing body. Although it will be a hassle, I am going to take the time to fill out the paperwork to get my money back because I don't believe in this "tax." I would like to encourage the Daily to pursue this issue in further articles. I would surely be interested in other opinions. -Sheryl L. Williamson September 24 Zinn }t4,DOt CVi'Lt 1w OTRISTRIAD'F~yE IN I