Opinion
260117008
The University Daily Kansan
4A
Laura Roddy, Editor
Sarah Hale, Managing editor
Kristi Elliott, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
Shauntie Blue, Business manager
Brad Bolyard, Retail sales manager
Matt Fisher, Sales and marketing adviser
Scott Valler, Technology coordinator
Tuesday, February 22, 2000
Patrick O'Connor / TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES
Editorials
Additional coalition may inject diversity into student elections
This year's Student Senate elections will feature three coalitions instead of two for the first time in several years. Although it is still uncertain whether this will be better or worse than the two-coalition races of the past few years, signs are encouraging so far.
One of the major complaints about the campaigns and candidates of the past has been that they were categorized according to their living organizations.
Candidates with ties to greek organizations tended to draw much of their support from other fraternity or sorority members, while students running in the other coalition often were perceived as wearing their non-greek status as badges of
Third group of candidates could weaken past dichotomy of greeks versus non greeks
honor. This Greek versus non-greek dichotomy usually relied more on stereotypes than on genuine differences.
This year, however, the situation is more complicated. Two of the candidates for student body president are members of fraternities. As more students decide to run for Senate, it almost is certain that diversity among candidates within the same coalition will be far more prevalent than uniformity.
What it may also mean is that rather than relying on personal attacks and stereotypes, the candidates will be forced to study the issues that students care about and construct their platforms accordingly.
form adopted by these coalitions will have to appeal to a variety of constituencies. Gone are the days when a coalition simply could essentially sell itself as the "greek coalition" and expect the votes to come rolling in.
But even if it is too early to tell just how different a three-coalition race will be, if it results in a campaign in which the needs and perspectives of all students are valued, that truly would be a bandwagon worth jumping on.
What this means is that any plat-
Tom Broderick for the editorial board
U.S. should honor pledge to Taiwan
The United States again is caught in a stare-down with another world superpower. This time it's with China. As relations between China and Taiwan grow increasingly strained, the United States is caught in the tension, as an ally and trading partner to both nations.
The United States needs to honor its pledge to Taiwan and reprimand China.
The alliance between the United States and Taiwan is 50 years old, dating back to the U.S. Mutual Defense Treaty. This treaty was enhanced in 1979 by the Taiwan Relations Act, which states: "Any effort to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means ... (is) of grave concern to the United States." In the treaty, the
A consistent foreign policy requires reprimanding China, aiding Taiwan's military
United States also pledges military support.
As of last fall, China had moved 500 to 600 M-9 and M-11 missiles to its eastern coast, directly across from Taiwan. Now is the time for the United States to come to Taiwan's aid. But there is some confusion as to how this would be done.
the State Department publicly reprimanded him. Even the current proposal to provide four *Aegis* naval missile defense ships has been all but dismissed. The U.S. Senate now seeks to pass the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act. President Clinton has vowed to veto it.
Clearly, the U.S. leadership is divided on the issue in the face of an ever jingoistic China. It should not be. Any attempt to change policy would make it appear that the United States is intimidated by China. In this international stare-down, the reputation of U.S. foreign policy as solid and consistent is on the line. To blink now is to indicate weakness and division — and the United States cannot afford to blink.
Invoking the Taiwan Relations Act last fall, Rear Admiral Dennis Blair said the United States would be justified in providing Taiwan with missile defense systems. The White House and
Kansan staff
Drew Ryun for the editorial board
Seth Hoffman ... Editorial
Nadia Mustafa ... Editorial
Melody Ard ... News/Special sections
Chris Fickett ... News
Julie Wood ... News
Juan H. Heath ... Online
Mike Miller ... Sports
Matt James ... Associate sports
Katie Hollar ... Campus
Nathan Willis ... Campus
Heather Woodward ... Features
Chris Borniger ... Associate features
T.J. Johnson ... Photo imaging
Christina Neff ... Photo
Jason Pearce ... Design, graphics
Clay McCuistion ... Wire
News editors
Becky LaBranch . . . Special sections
Krista Lindemann . . . Campus
Ryan Riggin . . . Regional
Jason Hannah . . . National
Will Baxter . . . Online sales
Patrick Rupe . . Online creative
Seth Schwimmer . . . Marketing
Jenny Weaver . . Creative layout
Matt Thomas . Assistant creative
Kenna Crone . Assistant creative
Trent Guyer . Classifieds
Jon Schitt . . . Zone
Thad Crane . . . Zone
Cecily Curran . . Zone
Christy Davies . . Zone
Advertising managers
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"Moderation is a virtue only in those who are thought to have an alternative." Henry Kiesinger
How to submit letters and guest columns
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
— Henry Kissinger
All letters and guest columns should be e-mailed to opinion@kansan.com or submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Nadia Mustafa or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (apinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924
Perspective
Principled leadership lacking in GOP race
Is it just me or was Alan Keyes the only one making sense in the Republican debate last week? While George W. Bush and John McCain continued to whine worse than my sister and I did in grade school, Keyes was able to insert level-headed perspective into the Republic race.
Although he has no chance of winning the nomination (this cycle anyway), by refusing to bow out, Keyes has done voters a service. He has kept it real, in the James Brown sense of the word. If you missed Larry King's debate, Keyes
— as he himself pointed it,
— articulated a vision,
even if arrogantly and with a touch of pretension.
Phil
Caution columnist
coined by anastasian.com
The two favorites bickered about trivialities. Keyes rightly said that
busn and McCain were "trying to be all things to all people," and when the inevitable bickering ensues, the context gets lost. If you've followed the campaigns, you know just how easy it is to get sucked along on those tangential disputes: Who ran what and when, whose stooges are worse than the other's, who's the outsider and why, blah blah blah ...
If you pull back from the details and look at things in their context — again as Keyes alluded to — you see an election process that is about candidates who put forward their principles as leaders and then must let the election chips fall where they may. Yet if you pull back too far, you easily can lose sight of principles all together. Ideals and politicking blur.
For example, saying you're a reformer — the label that McCain and Bush are fighting for — is neither a principle nor leadership. Back in 1992, Clinton said in his acceptance speech that "the most important thing that we understand here in the heartland of Arkansas is the need to reform the political system (and) to reduce the influence of special interests." (Gold water probably created this platform in 1964).
In fact, as the founding fathers knew, gridlock is the only realistic defense against narrow interests. A principled leader can, for example, say that, unequivocally, abortion is wrong, even if half his or her own party disagrees. Keyes did so Tuesday night. Bush and McCain, instead, tried to appease their base voters while saying things such as, "leave my daughter out of this," to not alienate the opposite end of the spectrum.
Saying you want to end Washington gridlock — as both McCain and Bush do — is likewise devoid of principled leadership. The problem is not that nothing is done in Washington. Just sift through the pages of bills passed by the 105th Congress (www.senate.gov and www.house.gov). Busy work is not a sign of progress.
Why should the most vehemently anti-Clinton folk be saying the same thing eight years later? If it's because Clinton changed 180 degrees in office, would McCain or Bush be any different?
Perhaps principled leadership must be saddled down with qualifications these days. Indeed, these are complex times. But one thing that I've run into time and again talking with and reporting about politicians while in Washington, D.C.: politicians can paint themselves with platitudes in any way that seems favorable at the moment.
Like the mayor in *Nightmare Before Christmas*, many politicians show their good faces to the good guys (voters) and their bad faces to the bad guys (other politicians). The more bickering that goes on for the voters' sake, the more likely it is that they are trying to conceal those bad faces. The eventual flaw of two-faced platitudes is that one leader cannot lead in two different directions at once. Keyes relies on what any candidate should: principled leadership. He is not, in the end, just a P.O.W., a familiar face or an African-American man. He is a leader. No apologies.
Cauthon is a North Richland Hills, Texas, graduate student in journalism. He is an intern at the Washington, D.C., bureau of the Houston Chronicle this semester.
U.S. shouldn't let money affect human rights stance
One reason to keep Elian in the United States is the lack of protection of rights in Cuba. Elian should have the opportunity to escape repression by his government and instead remain in the United States, where civil rights are protected more widely.
At first, I didn't understand the hassle about Elian Gonzalez as I watched footage of cars in Miami blocking streets and protests in Cuba. But I soon realized that the issue directly is related to questions of political asylum, and in turn, of human rights. This case will provide a landmark implication about U.S. foreign policy.
U. S. foreign policy makes clear its opinion of Fidel Castro's domination of Cuba through economic embargoes in response to Cuba's human rights abuses. The United States must maintain a consistent foreign policy in regards to human rights in Cuba and elsewhere.
The United Nations' universal declaration of human rights outlines basic civil rights that all humans are entitled to, regardless of where they live. But these
Hupail
Limaye
columnist
conining@kansan.com
rights, which are intended to be all-encompassing,
are widely debated. More importantly, the U.S. definition of rights is not always consistent.
nation of Rights is the focus. A telling example is U.S. foreign policy toward China. The Clinton administration states that it seeks to protect basic rights, but, money talks and overrides certain goals. According to Amnesty International, China has one of the highest rates of human rights abuse in the world.
Yet as the United States seeks to exert its sphere of influence in southeast Asia by trying to promote U.S. ideals, it fails miserably in China. The bottom line is that we heavily rely on China economically, and as a result, the protection of human rights becomes a secondary goal. Although the United States publicly condemns China's child labor abuses, we continue to trade and grant China "Most
States seeking permanent day care. In the case of Elian, it seems that the United States has nothing to lose. Cuba didn't really have anything of value to the United States, except cigars and rum, so the United States can afford condemning Cuba and proclaiming why Elian deserves to stay here.
But just wonder how the United States would react if Cuba was a strong economic partner such as China, and if we needed Cuba for certain services only it could provide. The American public would see an entirely different response to Elian's situation, and he would not receive as much media attention. The situation probably would be put on the back burner as a more low-key issue.
Favored Nation" status each year, allowing the nation to have lower tariffs. The United States ignores obvious human rights abuses, choosing to look the other way while Chinese citizens are not allowed to speak freely. Evidence enough of China's repressive government is that each year a significant number of Chinese flee to the United States seeking political asylum.
The United States once again can be the winner in this mess. By condemning Cuba for its human rights abuses, the United States can be viewed as morally upright and can set an example for other countries that seek to establish hegemony. The United States can at least try to portray that it is attempting to protect people universally.
The United States' coming decision in the Elian case ultimately will be based on an effort to be viewed as morally superior to other nations — nations that might have taken a different course of action because they are motivated simply by greed.
The truth is that Elian, or his mother on his behalf, was seeking political asylum. The United States should recognize Cuba's human rights abuses and should grant Elian asylum. It is hoped that we will maintain a consistent foreign policy by allowing Elian to stay and by re-evaluating, and perhaps becoming more stringent, in our economic relationship with China.
Limiey is an Olathe junior in political science and advertising.
Feedback
Rights legislation needs local support
As Breeze Luetke-Stahlman foreshadowed in her column Feb. 17, Rigoberta Menchu, human rights defender and Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, addressed Guatemalan human rights violations last Friday.
More than 200,000 Guatemalans were killed or simply "disappeared" during the nation's 30-year conflict. Guatemala has asked the U.S. to release documents relating to human rights violations; Honduras also has done so. The United States has had close ties
to both countries, but has not been very forthcoming.
Congress is in a position to bring answers and closure to the families of the deceased or "disappeared" persons by passing the Human Rights Information Act. This bill would release information about human rights violations in Guatemala and Honduras and enable people to learn what happened to their loved ones. In the case of "disappeared" persons, the information may allow the recovery of their remains for forensic examination and a dignified burial. In addition, this bill could help bring human rights criminals
to justice and strengthen the rule of law.
I encourage Lawrence citizens to write to Rep. Dennis Moore and urge him to co-sponsor the Human Rights Information Act (H.R. 1625). Unfortunately, Menchu and members of her family experienced these abuses firsthand; the legislation will help bring reconciliation and justice to Guatemala and Honduras and will help create a process for other international human rights investigations.
42
Kyle Browning KU Amnesty International, president Overland Park junior