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.

October 22, 1990 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1990-10-22

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

0

Page 4 -The Michigan Daily - Monday, October 22, 1990
EIbr £iigan 1BaiIy
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS
AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109

NOAH FINKEL
Editor in Chief

DAVID SCHWARTZ
Opinion Editor

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.

Viewpoint
l -- C
* i~i- -

South Africa

0

Limited changes don't make de Klerk a hero

THOUGH THE BUSH ADMINISTRA-
tion earlier this month paraded F.W. de
Klerk to the international community as
a vanguard of the anti-apartheid move-
ment in South Africa, no actual dis-
mantling of the apartheid apparatus has
occurred. Some concessions have been
made, but there is little evidence that de
Klerk is serious about giving up
power.
As a handful of the thousands of
political prisoners trickle slowly out of
South African jails, de Klerk buys
much needed time: time to appeal for an
ending of international sanctions
abroad - with corresponding profits
for the white elite - and time to insti-
gate a campaign of terror at home to de-
legitimize the African National ,
Congress (ANC).
More than 700 Black South Africans
have died in Natal in the past two ;
months. Although the fighting has been
portrayed as disagreements between .the
predominantly Zulu Inkatha movement
and the multi-racial - ANC, de Klerk
himself has been forced to admit that a
"third force" was atrwork.
Under the guise of ending "Black on
Black" violence and "the breakdown of
order," South African security forces
have instigated a reign of terror. On
Sept. 15, the government started a
harsh crackdown in the townships and ,
dubbed it "Operation Iron Fist." Strict
curfews were enforced; police in ma-

chine gun-mounted vehicles patrolled
the communities which were encircled
with razor-wire fencing. ANC leader
Nelson Mandela has called this opera-
tion "a license to kill our people indis-
criminately."
In the recent bloodshed, South
African security forces have been
openly siding with Inkatha against the
ANC; a number of Inkatha leaders have
allegedly been on the payroll of the
government for some time.
The violence sweeping South Africa
is not the "savage chaos" that accom-
panies tribalism. Rather, it is related
directly to the white government's role
in destabilizing the Black community.
Its motive is simply to set itself up as
the stabilizing force between Black fac-
tionalism, and thus legitimize its con-
tinued brutal suppression of the Black
majority.
In a country where 72.7 percent of
the population live on 3.7 percent of
the land, where less than one percent of
arable land is owned by Blacks, where
40 percent of all Africans are unem-
ployed and 60 percent are underem-
ployed, it is understandable that some
South Africans disavow the laws of
solidarity in the name of survival. But
for the Bush administration to give tacit
support to de Klerk, and ignore the will
of the vast majority of the South
African people, only serves to perpet-
uate apartheid.

............

---_.
i

3

G VE DU

DT ATOMIN! PARTYu
~ThR\1 AND I1A a. '(QU

WAS WIRON6 ALL
\WESTE RN -STYL E

AWNrq! NOw~
CAPITIL I&T l

Help Ann Arbor's 'alternative' publication
n a a" fl S

By Susi uRemold

Agenda, Ann Arbor's alternative news-
monthly, is an important resource in Ann
Arbor that recieves less attention than it
deserves.
In its articles Age-nda draws
connections between campus issues and
local, national and international politics.
Their coverage of issues fosters greater
communication and understanding between
the University and the Ann Arbor area
community.
The paper has been publishing for four
years, and in the past Agenda has covered
stories ranging from illegal FBI spying on
campus and national activists groups, to
the effects of televisions racism and sex-
ism on todays youth.
Most articles are written by Ann Arbor
residents, providing a community point of
view to the readership and a forum for
communication and debate for those who
wish to write.

Because it is independently owned and
operated, Agenda is able to enforce a
policy of nonoppressive advertisement,
creating a truly alternative newspaper.
75 percent of Agenda's funding needs
to come from this advertising in order for
them to continue to publish. Most of the
cost is printing and paper fees. Since
Agenda has only two paid staff members,
all the rest of the work is done by volun-
teers.

I

for discussion and debate among the pro-
gressive community. If it disappears, the
grass roots ideas will not be so readily
available.
There are many capacities in which
volunteers could help save this valuable
alternative news source. Directly, Agenda
needs monetary contributions and people*
to solicit ads on commission. In addition,
volunteers helping in business, writing,
editing, layout and distribution will free

Because it is independently owned and operated,
Agenda is able to enforce a policy of nonoppressive
advertisement, creating a truly alternative newspaper.

Puerto Rico
United States should allow self-determination

Advertising has been falling off in the
past year, most likely due to competition.
Unless Agenda recieves help, either in the
form of volunteers or money, it will stop
printing. Because the mainstream media
will not publish the kind of stories that
Agenda covers, this would be a loss of an
important campus and community re-
source. Agenda provides a unique forum

time for others to solicit support. There
are internships available for all students,*
from business to women's studies.
20,000 people benefit from this
campus and comunity resource; more need
to contribute if it is going to be around in
the future.
To subscribe or volunteer, call the
Agenda office at 996-8018.

SENATOR BENNET JOHNSON (D-
LA), claiming there is not enough time'
left this term, has effectively shelved a
proposal that would have allowed the
Puerto Rican people to vote next year
on whether they want to retain their
commonwealth status. As a conse-
quence, Puerto Ricans are once again
being denied the right to decide their
4own future.
Jose Serrano, Puerto Rico's con-
gressional representative, called John-
gon's decision "a major disappointment
to millions of Puerto Rican Americans
who have waited for years with con-
siderable patience for this fundamental
right of self-determination."
Self determination has been denied
Puerto Ricans since Columbus
"discovered" the territory in 1493 and
claimed it for Spain. Ceded by Spain to
the United States in 1898 - without
consulting Puerto Ricans themselves
- it remains a colony, one of the last
in the entire world. Though Washing-
ton cloaks this colonialism by designat-
ing Puerto Rico a "commonwealth in
free association" with the United
States, the reality is quite different.
One-third of all U.S. corporate

Remold is a University;
Ann Arbor resident.

graduate and an

profits from Latin America come from
Puerto Rico. Despite massive subsidies
to the island - which allow Washing-
ton to justify its continuing presence
there - the United States takes seven
times as much money out of Puerto
Rico as it puts in. In the process, U.S.
firms doing business there -- primarily
pharmaceuticals and petrochemicals -
have destroyed its environment. And
the island is a floating U.S. arsenal,
housing 16 U.S. military bases.
In this context, even the shelved
congressional proposal only begins to
solve the problems it purports to ad-
dress. As the United Nations stated in a
key resolution passed in 1960, no
colony can possibly have free and fair
elections concerning its future so long
as the colonizing power maintains a
military presence there.
The United States cannot continually
proclaim the importance of self deter-
mination for the peoples of the Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe unless it is
willing to expedite this process with its
own colonies. Let the Puerto Rican
people decide their future, in an atmo-
sphere conducive to making that deci-
sion a free and fair one.

Daily's criticisms of Israel are misguided

4

Green devolution
Progress means more misery for the Third World

To the Daily:
This letter is in response to the recent
editorials regarding the situation in the
Middle East and more directly, the reper-
cussions of the Oct. 8, 1990, riot in
Jerusalem.
As a very well respected publication
the Daily should watch more closely its
own statements and statistics as well as
pay more attention to the accuracy of its
claims regarding controversial news items.
I am first referring to the gross over
exaggeration of the numbers of fatalities
and wounded that the Daily printed in con-
nection with the Oct. 8 incident. Although
the main point should be that the loss of
even one life, Israeli or Palestinian, is too
many, in the issue of Oct. 17 the Daily
presented many conflicting facts that pre-
sented the situation in an incorrect man-
ner.
In one article, ("Israel opposes U.N. In-
quiry of Mount Killings,") you stated (via
the AP) that there were "fatal police shoot-
ings of at least 19 Palestinians" and "more
than 140 Palestinians wounded." These
statistics were also consistent with the
UP, and the New York Times.
However the Daily announces on the
Opinion Page that "the incident resulted in
the deaths of at least 24 Palestinians and
the injury of more than 300 others." These
figures show both the tremendous bias of
the Daily in its assessment of the situa-
tion and their poor journalistic credibility
in looking at the incident from such a dis-
tance.
Beyond this, the article continues by
claiming that "Israel has shown time and
again that it reacts to rock throwing by in-
discriminately shooting any Palestinian
unfortunate enough to be in the vicinity."
Despite the fact that this claim is not true,
the Israeli army policy on firing at demon-
strators is completely clear and followed
strictly by soldiers at the risk of court
martial and prosecution, even in the event
that their life was in danger and their firing
was justified.
The policy for Israeli Defence Forces is

manner. The pressures between Iraq and
the World (except for the Palestine Libera-
tion Organization), the Israeli-Palestinian
problems, and tension across the region
necessitate this in order to prevent a fu-
ture of continued violence.
With this in mind, I hope the Daily.
will look more closely at its accusations
and standpoints and present the facts in a
fair and accurate manner to its readers.
Eliot Goldstein
First-Year Student
Israel only trying to
protect its citizens
To the Daily:
After reading the editorial on the shoot-
ing incident that occurred recently in
Jerusalem ("Jerusalem Killings,"
10/17/90), I feel the need to clarify some
facts you have obfuscated concerning this
event. As an eyewitness to the tension
within the country, I can say that the Is-
raeli army does not initiate violence with
the Palestinian people. What would be its
gain?
The country receives enough criticism
without provoking it. It seems to me that
the Daily, as it accuses the well-estab-
lished, professional news media of the
United States of doing, has evaluated the
facts subjectively.
First of all, the Daily doesn't believe
that Palestinians threw rocks at the
"peaceful Jewish worshippers." They were
not protesters, as is claimed. As to the sta-
tus of the crowd, it was most certainly
peaceful. The Wailing Wall is a holy site,
roped off, and guarded by orthodox
citizens.
Undercover Israeli agents would not
have been allowed near the Wall with any
sort of weaponry. The orthodox refuse to
allow guns, official badge or no official
badge.
Secondly, stonings by Palestinians oc-
cur regularly. I have personally been sub-
jected to this. Stonings are so frequent that
they no longer receive media coverage.

.fact is that the soldiers aren't even allowed
to carry their weapons loaded.
Out of occasional necessity for protec-
tion, as in this case, the soldiers are or-
dered to load their weapons. This brings
me to my final point: the Palestinians are
not unarmed. A sharp, heavy rock that is
the size of one's fist and is given signifi-
cant velocity can kill someone - even an
innocent bystander.
No, I don't agree with all of Israel's
policies and actions. And no, I don't con-
done violence as a solution to a problem. I
mourn bothIsraeli and Palestinian deaths.
But the fact remains: Israel is not the big,
bad, selfish, violent, oppressive regime
the Daily contends it to be. It's just a
country trying to protect its people.
Morgan Kristal
LSA Sophomore
Daily should concentrate
more on accuracy
To the Daily:
Inflammatory remarks and misreporting
of information, no matter how trendy the
cause, does nothing to solve problems or
further understanding ("Students hold vigil
for Palestinians," 10/10/90). The AP and
UPI reports have set the death count at 19.
Why does the Daily report 30?
The Daily also reported that the "clash
occurred after Palestinians threw stones at
an Israeli military post above the Wailing
Wall."
According to all of the networks and
news services, the Palestinians had gath-
ered rocks and threw them upon the
20,000 Jews praying at the Wall below
the Mount. I've been to the area in ques-
tion and can assure you that the military
post is out of rock throwing range from
the Temple Mount.
Maybe the Daily should ask why the
rocks were gathered in advance? Why were
the Palestinians throwing rocks at a group
of Jews praying in their holiest of places?
An ,nQ1.ghanti1,;A ,n,,n rridtpAthat

"

AS EARTH CONTINUES TO HEAT UP
and its residents become increasingly
conscious of the consequences, the
Third World has come under mounting
criticism for its inability to protect its
share of the world's dwindling re-
sources.
Rarely, however, are we given a full
account of the first world's contribu-
tions to and exacerbation of these and
other environmental crises. The Bhopal
disaster in India, which took 3,000
lives and disabled 200,000 more, pro-
vides the most glaring example of how
first world multinationals have used
Third World countries to employ in-
dustrial standards far lower than those
that would have been acceptable in their
base countries.
Cloaked in shibboleths like

modest projects benefitting many more
people.
The Third World's water resources
have not escaped the consequences of
this underdevelopment either. Fishers
throughout the Third World are
watching their catch dwindle as multi-
national trawlers - with sophisticated
modern equipment - drain the sea
while effluents from first world facto-
ries pollute local rivers and lakes.
If the Third World is to achieve
genuine development - in a way that
might both feed its people and preserve
its ecological systems - the first world
must honestly acknowledge how it has
underdeveloped these regions and
make appropriate reparations. Rather
than pushing phony solutions like
"debt for nature swaps," countries such
as the United States should cancel all

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan