9 4A - The Michigan Daily - Monday, September 23, 2002 OP/ED U~be £ [rltrbianiluiI 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 NOTABLE QUOTABLE I don't know what to say to thank the family of the man killed in the attack." CO c v c SAM BUTLER TvE SOAPBJX , / , 1 } (' ., \ y - \ t \^- Y +,-' /i \ 4 te l: ~ . ., u 9 /\ rdwe see }now .)4 AP prCVymAp u5ss+5+O o 9Qk4 o. iwV~ok i + IjJafA+s, 0 SalQ.P ojo r- - '~eNot ukioniox'3 ±rod(. 1o-W4r~uIZ Se~s Wine1 p, pat'- Frmv-WeeSi- OP +1,e QY.aimvo l K c~ool, i 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. J S "' d; Q stp, r - Rina Abu Ramila, a Palestinian woman whose daughter finally received a kidney from a Jewish donor killed in the August Hebrew University suicide bombing, as quoted in yesterday's Jerusalem Post. Framing Iraq in the quasi-victory of Afghanistan JOHANNA HANINK PARLANCE OF OUR TIMES 4 esterday's Sun- day New York Times show- cased, as the Times is wont to do, an interest- ing juxtaposition of arti- cles on its front page. Lead story: "Israel tells U.S. it will retaliate if Iraqis attack." Close second: "Bush's push on Iraq at U.N.: Head- way, then new barriers." Neither of these headlines gave any sort of indication that the people at the Times are secretly pushing for that oh-so inevitable pre- emptive strike. The stories themselves didn't give that me that impression either - the one about the United States, the United Nations and Iraq seemed an impressive piece of evenhanded and frank news analysis. What was most inter- esting about yesterday's page-one design deci- sion was how these two stories appeared in the context of the smaller one that was printed, still on the front page, but below the fold. "Long in dark, Afghan women say to read is finally to see" ran in the vein of last year's Nov. 13 front-pager "In a fallen Tal- iban city, a busy, busy barber." The story is compelling, carefully crafted, designed to elicit a hard emotional response from the reader. Carlotta Gall recreates the scene of Afghan women, crowded around their teacher (with pointer in hand), nursing babies and trying to control toddlers, chanting the "Afghan" alphabet: Alef, Be, Te ..." It's hard not to be affected by this kind of story. A photo accompanying the piece cap- tured a moment in a classroom when veiled and barefoot women sat on the floor, intently focused on the characters chalked on the black- board - another: An adorable little girl with a tattered book open, mouthing her alef-be. Classes are springing up faster than women can register for them thanks to the lift on the Taliban's ban of educating women, a lift that was U.S.-slash-Northern Alliance mil- itary-incursion induced. The article made our entire nation, through a literary and photo- graphic cameo, party to a heartrending display of the quiet triumph of Afghanistan's women. Now, we can see for ourselves how a pocket of Central Asia has brightened with a little tweaking from the United States - and yes- terday we saw all this right below stories that should make us think about whether we need to invade Iraq. How convenient. However incidental the placement might have been, it should be enough to cause us to question into what framework we are putting an Iraqi invasion. The Afghanistan incursion was on many counts a disaster. The govern- ment remains unbelievably unstable; Presi- dent Karzai's life remains constantly at risk. Despite calls for and promises of post- shelling nation building, the Afghan people have perhaps benefitted most notably from what the United States took away - burkas and beards. Sans al-Qaida (perhaps), they are still left with a country steeped in poverty and a political situation marked by volatility. An examination of the current situation regarding Iraq in the framework of the social benefits of U.S. military action is also mis- leading. After the United States invaded Afghanistan last year, an equal number of analyses of the sociology of liberation (remember that catchphrase - the liberation of Kabul?) found their way onto the pages dedicated to reporting the search for terror- ists. Adding a human touch to the War on Terrorism certainly helps President Bush's case - a heartwarming, tear-jerker of a story here and there makes the shelling of a city a lot easier to swallow. It's important to recognize that there is a motivational distinction between national defense (or offense) and social development. If it's "liberation" - equal rights, religious, media, speech freedoms - that we're after, we shouldn't frame it in a policy of punish- ment. If it's regime change for purposes of national - our nation's - security, then we can't soften the blows with exuberant pic- tures of men being shaven and shorn for the first time in years. If there's going to be a war, maybe we can justify it. But it needs to be justified through the reality of the political situation, not through the international fluff pieces floating around the front pages of influential newspapers. It will be a wonderful thing if some good comes out of a U.S. strike on Iraq. Sadly, our very recent track record in Afghanistan makes that sort of hope to be a feeling that must be predicated by enormous optimism. This war will require candidness of purpose, honesty which cannot be compromised by an emotional appeal. Pretty soon we'll be going in there to get rid of Saddam Hussein because it suits us - so let's not pretend it's for the good of the Iraqi people. Johanna Hanink can be reached at jhanink@umich.edu. DO THE WRITE THING. DAILY MASS MEETING TONIGHT; 9 P.M. 420 MAYNARD. SEE 'U' ThEE. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Impossibility of complete fairness obvious; doesn't mean we should stop trying To THE DAILY: Fairness is "folly?" Equality is an ideal "not even worth pursuing?!" Perhaps I have been wrong this whole time, believing in some elu- sive, naive values of justice and democracy. But ... call me an idealist, I cannot accept this. Luke Smith, in his article Fostering the naive perception of equality, (9/19/02) has a valid (although completely obvious) point - com- plete faimess can never be achieved. But is this a reason to stop trying? Yes, people must live with the hands they are dealt. Some of us are lucky, and some of us, not so much. Genetics, economic circum- stances, family situations - these are compo- nents of one's existence no one can control. But the ideal of equality has never been to change that which is out of our hands. Pursuing equali- ty in any sense has always been about attempt- ing to balance that which is in our power to change - biases, opinions, judgment. If fair- ness is such an unattainable ideal, then perhaps we should cease to strive for impartiality in our judicial system. Or perhaps we should put chil- dren with mental handicaps in classrooms with- out any extra aid, expecting them to simply fend for themselves in this unfair world. But we can't. We won't. Because we know we can make changes to attain some semblance of equality. It will never be perfect, obviously - but does this mean that it's not worth a shot? The admissions system in many universities around the country is flawed, I am in complete agreement here. But college admissions is a game, and kids who are from privileged back- grounds are given the extra strategies required to maneuver in this game - kids from less for- tunate backgrounds are often left without any such special tactics. It is not as simple as work- ing hard to get good grades and test scores, it is a complex system of embellishing the truth and increasing raw talent - with outside help. To think otherwise is the real naivete. The criteria of educational institutions is something within our control - and thus, it is our responsibility to strive toward this elusive ideal of equality. I shudder to think of a world where we one day no longer take this responsibility seriously. AsHWINI HARDIKAR LSA freshman Minorities: 'Do not accept handouts,' sub-par stanrdds TO THE DAILY: Affirmative action. Those two words can cause heated debates in almost any circle. Is it necessary? Does it really do anything positive for society? I honestly do not know the answer. to these questions. What I do know is that our public school systems in this country suck. Why not end affirmative action and replace it with a system that lends itself toward a truer equality. So many people complain about stu- dents (usually minorities) getting into universi- ties with sub-standard grades and test scores. What these people tend to forget is that the school systems many of these minorities attend- ed provided sub-standard educations. Why not replace affirmative action with a system that simply takes into account the school district one attended and not one's race. Let's be honest, there are plenty of non-minority students that attend the same sub-standard institutions as minorities. Is it right that these non-minority students do not get the same breaks as their minority counterparts? No. Affirmative action was created to foster equality not reverse dis- crimination. Now, on a personal note, affirmative action to me is an insult. I see it simply as the "pow- ers that be" telling me that because I am a minority I am not expected to perform at the same level as my non-minority counterpart. Wrong. One of the major problems I encoun- tered while attending an urban school and sub- sequently teaching at one, is the lack of expectations. Lowering of school standards to meet the expected lower performances of stu- dents simply works to perpetuate students that already perform poorly to perform at an even lower level. Too many minorities feel as though a high- er education should be given to them simply because of their minority status. No. Do not accept handouts or sub-standard requirements. Do not foster and perpetuate the notion that minorities are incapable of the same level of achievement as non-minorities. Do not allow the racists of this country to say, "well of course they got in to Michigan, they're a minority" as though that were the only reason for your success. Stand up and let them know that you made it because you busted your ass. That despite the odds, you not only got here, you are going to leave here with your degree firmly in hand. ZIKIYA NORTON Rackham 0 6 0 VIEWPOINT LHSP has bright future; commitment to diversity BY PATTY SKUSTER AND BEN MCDONOUGH We are writing in response to Jeremy Berkowitz's article, Diversity a Concern for LHSP Members, published in Sept. 16's Daily. As two Resident Fellow instructors in our sec- ond year with the Lloyd Hall Scholars Program, we are concerned that the article could promote misconceptions about the program's identity and about its goals. m7Tli m._: tl r o ai r n rra enroll in a wide range of academic courses and participate in, community programs offered in the building where they live. LHSP is a place where students' home, social and academic lives converge as they begin their studies in the University at large. We have seen the program move in positive directions during our time living and working within LHSP and have also seen it cope with the many challenges associated with its unique qualities. Although the position of live-in Resi- dent Fellow may cease to exist, LHSP instruc- .. .>+ r.4:11 .L nr n nn -rnt -nr .it t has implemented a new diversity outreach pro- gram aimed at attracting a more diverse student body. In seeking a critical assessment of its own strengths and weaknesses, the program has looked outside to the Sweetland Writing Center and the Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, which are providing expert teaching support to this year's Resident Fellows. Finally, the program is continuing its proud support of the fine arts through its Arts on the Hill pro- gram, whose coordinator, Mark Tucker, suc- ceeded in proving to the College of Literature, Science and the Arts. Kinesiologv. Nursing and 0 ' , :>r .,, _ _ , 777 AN