4A - The Michigan Daily - Monday, March 25, 2002 OP/ED a I ahbe Alkbiguu flail 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 letters@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JON SCHWARTZ Editor in Chief JOHANNA HANINK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. NOTABLE QUOTABLE "There's a lot of frustration in European public opinion." - European union trade commissioner Pascal Lamy in a March 22 New York Times story, referring to the tariffs that the EU is placing on common U.S. imports in reaction to the U.S. 's new steel trade restrictions. &ZS~. vas OoLArc~ Ask~ v SVouk our~ r r I h f THOMAS KULJURGIS TENTATIVELY SP:EAKING 1VW U&VE A NW A STUDEAYV~ LE AV' ON 915S CsAMA~- STL'PIE5 IR~S. ACCOENTALLAY GAVE RIM IN StOLOWY AM UCLEW SCIt.RCE. The U.S. vying for attention in the Middle East JOHANNA HANINK PARLANCE OF OUR Ti Ms 4 n Thursday, Oct. 8,. 1998, the House of Representatives voted on an impeachment inquiry resolution against then-President Bill Clinton. That same day, Clinton, speaking at a health care event in the White House's Roosevelt room, announced, "Yesterday I decided that the United States would vote to give NATO the authority to carry out military strikes against Serbia if President Milosevic continues to defy the international community." Ten months earlier, on Jan. 9, New Line Cinema had released "Wag the Dog," a fright- eningly prophetic movie in which a Hollywood producer (Dustin Hoffman) and a presidential spin doctor (Robert DeNiro) concoct a war in Albania - complete with refugees, a hero and a theme-song - in order to take the heat off of a presidential sex scandal. The only significant difference between the actions of the Clinton administration and the fic- tion of the movie seems to be that President Clinton's war wasn't against Albania, but on behalf of ethnic Albanians residing in Kosovo. The "wag the dog" phenomenon was noth- ing new in 1998; every American military inter- vention since the Vietnam War has arguably displayed some symptoms. As the role of the media in shaping public opinion, reporting on - and to some extent creating - world events has soared, political figures have responded by wising up to ever-craftier methods of media- manipulation. Take Dick Cheney and his "bureau of misinformation" (gone now, he promises) for starters. ' However, it seems that wagging the dog has taken an accidental twist. Much to George W. Bush and his administration's dismay, the esca- lation of violence in the Middle East has sent what should be an embarrassing war on terror- ism to page two of the collective American political consciousness. More importantly, it has distracted the international community from giving its full attention to America's PR-slash- anti-terrorism rhetorical campaign. Bush entered office intent on taking a far less active role than his predecessor in mediating the conflict in the Middle East. When the violence of the second intifada would periodically escalate to a level at which it would have been both ridicu- lous and embarrassing for the President of the United States to shy from comment, he made half-hearted and disinterested calls for restraint from Israelis and Palestinians alike. The U.S. has now sent Gen. Anthony Zinni back to Israel to help the negotiations process, George Bush's next call in a confusing back and forth policy dance. Left (Sept. 11 comes and Bush deploys Zinni to push the Mitchell and Tenet peace plans)-right (the violence increases and Bush pulls Zinni out until the situation grows quieter and safer)-left (the U.S. wants the conflict solved and solved fast so the world can get back to crying for our losses and backing the war on terror). Why is it that now Bush decides to pick up the slack of a neglected responsibility to peace- advocacy in the most volatile - and somehow, the most symbolic - New Jersey-sized peace of land in the world? The answer is not about a lasting peace in the Middle East. Somehow, the United States, vying for international support, has selfishly managed to make the Mideast peace process not about peace, not about the lives of Palestinians and Israelis, but about us. The United States is playing the petulant and ignored middle child. A lot of it comes down to the reality (about which Bush is unapologetic) that we want to settle our scores against Iraq. We want to bomb them but we want to bomb them with interna- tional support. After we've taken care of Afghanistan, it would be an even uglier move in the eyes of Arab states to attack Iraq and contin- ue to hate on or simply ignore the Palestinians at the same time. But the irony is that Arab states aren't pay- ing that much attention to us at the moment - and neither are European ones. The world has found something more important to worry about in the Arab-Israeli conflict than the United States' vengeful and arbitrary war on terrorism. Reentering the negotiations process serves two purposes. We look good to the interna- tional community; we look like we care about the security issues that countries other than ourselves face. Second, we move along a peace process so the world can get back to caring about what we wish it were focused on right now: Throw- ing support behind the impending attacks on the axis of evil. Supporting continued attacks on Afghanistan and the Philippines. Support- -ing our own terrorism in the name of extin- guishing terror. Last week, Vice President Cheney conclud- ed an 11-country grand tour of the Middle East and North Africa. A very real piece of news has interfered with the spotlight on the United States and Cheney was out there making sure to get it turned back on. We won't let anyone forget what the United States suffered one Tuesday in September. Even if it means pretending like we genuinely care about someone else. 4 I I Johanna Hanink can be reached atjhanink@umich.edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR It takes an American to criticize America To THE DAILY: Sean Caron managed to pique my curiosity several times in his letter regarding Yael Kohen's column (Kohen's column displayed ignorance of international affairs; United States' role, 3/22/02). First, I'd love to know whether Caron has ever apologized for his nationality. Here's how my typi- cal greeting went upon meeting a new European: "Hi, I'm Dana, I'm American and I'm sorry." This was how I let people know that, although I'm from the States, that doesn't mean that I agree with nor am I proud of the SUV/Survivor/bombs/Christian tyranny degeneration that's become our culture. But an apology is unnecessary, because it's not I who commits the acts that deserve apology. Secondly, Kohen stated that "even the most liberal and the most critical of Americans" get sick of being told we're wrong. Being a liberal, critical American, I agree with Caron that Ameri- ca's neo-imperialism is an unnecessary display of our absurdly overdeveloped military muscles - but it's entirely different to hear it from foreigners. One can't smile and admit the errors of her country's idiot leaders (not her errors) for long before she gets sick of it and wishes they would leave her damn country alone. I wonder how Caron would feel, for example, if his grandfather blew up the Cube and everyone he met on campus told him he sucks because he's related to the man who blew up the Cube. So. Our country is unrefined; our Constitution is slowly being undermined; we're constantly overstepping our boundaries; and even I plan to move to Canada after college to get out of this land of the "free." However, I do not like receiv- ing all blame and no credit. I entirely agree with Caron's letter, with the exception of Kohen's "disregard for international sentiment." I just wish he'd traveled a bit so he could perhaps know what Kohen, and thus him- self, was talking about. DANA HEITZ LSA junior RA to Jeremy Peters: 'Bravo on your exit from couth' To THE DAILY: I'm glad Jeremy Peters' editorial concerning Residential Assistants was printed in the Daily on Friday (RA's: There are better ways to spend tuition dollars). Someday, when he sends his equally dis- dainful and solipsistic children to college (should he unfortunately procreate), he should have a chance to re-read and re-think his short-sighted and mean-spirited comments. I was an RA at the University of New Hamp- shire (1990-92). Though you're asked to imple- ment social programs, hall activities, etc., an RA quickly finds himself assisting in the problems of their residents. That is the main reason RAs are put in place at a university: They are often a stu- dent's best nonjudgemental source for help when they need (or want) it. That includes assistance with understanding course registration, getting counseling, receiving medical attention, or simply having a shoulder to cry on. If you've served a tour as an RA, you've seen and smelled just about everything; and I would encourage students to ask their RAs about their experiences and to support them. I had residents with attitudes similar to Jere- my's, usually males suffering from a protracted case of "Tough Guy Syndrome." Some realized over time that I wasn't their enemy, just a student like them who was willing to make sacrifices to help them and to listen. Others never came around (e.g. Jeremy), never missing an opportunity to ridicule me or other RAs with silly, unsubstantiat- ed, and just plain mean comments. I applaud Jere- my for taking it to the next level and publicizing his carelessly flippant remarks in the Daily. Bravo Jeremy, on your exit from couth. KENNETH LONGO Medical School postdoctoral fellow I VIEWPOINT The real problems with the case of Rabih Haddad I by Jim Secreto As Americans, we tend to think of our democracy as open and our freedoms as, well, free. We relish the idea - as abstract as it may seem - that a Constitution exists to protect us from any right-infringing evil that may rear its ugly head toward our collective civil liberties. We like the thought that our government is account- able, accessible, approachable and, you better believe, we are accustomed to these beliefs. Yet, as the impact of Sept. 11 continues to manifest itself months after the initial terrorist attacks, we are coming to the sad realization that our assumptions about American democracy, openness and freedom are just that - assump- tions. While democracy and openness have yet to achieve a relationship defined by mutual exclu- sivity, neo-America seems all too willing to evidence of, funding terrorist organizations. But the openness in American democracy has little to do with the status of Haddad's visa, his nationality or whether his group funds terrorists; it has everything to do with his ability to have a fair and open trial in a country we assume values its own constitutional rights. Specifically, Haddad has faced three hearings in immigration court thus far and all have been closed to the public. This closure is what prompt- ed the American Civil Liberties Union of Michi- gan to file a lawsuit in federal court on behalf of the Detroit News, the Metrotimes and U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) asserting that the public and press have First Amendment and due process rights to attend Haddad's hearings. The lawsuit hearings, which begin tomorrow morning in fed- eral court in Detroit, are the first in the nation challenging the U.S. Patriot Act and the govern- ment's policies since Sept. 11. The public has a constitutional right to a judi- cial system that is accessible and open. As David Cole of the Center for Constitutional Rights put it, "Open trials are the bedrock of our justice system. Secret trials are the hallmark of totalitarian societies." Admittedly, in times of crisis, there is a natur- al push towards stiffening those protections already in place to protect law-abiding Ameri- cans. Theoretically, closed trails can protect American lives by keeping sensitive information on national security away from those who would use it violently and unlawfully. However, the essence of a closed trail does not allow for the public to know if a trial really is sensitive to national security. Hence, closed trails eliminate any checks on governmental power, forcing us to trust the government. But it is not the best idea to assume the gov-