OPINION
1
The University Daily KANSAN
September 6, 1983 Page 4
The University Daily KANSAN
Published since 1889 by students of the University of Kansas
The University of Dayton (ISP85 606-469) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Staffer Fint Hall, Lawrence, KA. 60045, daily during the regular school year and Monday and Thursday during weekends excluding Saturday. Student subscriptions are $1 for six months or $2 for a outside state. Student subscriptions are $1 for six months or $2 for a within county. Student subscriptions are $1 a semester paid through the student account. Some subscriptions are $1 a semester paid through the student account. Student subscriptions are $1 a semester paid through the student account. Some
MARK ZIEMAN Editor
DOUG CUNNINGHAM STEVE CUSICK
Managing Editor Editorial Author
MICHAEL ROBINSON
Campus Editor
PAUL JESS
General Manager and News Adviser
ANN HORNBERGER Business Manager
DAVE WANAMAKER MARK MEARS
Retail Sales National Sales
Manager Manager
LYNNE STARK
Campus Sales Manager
JOHN OBERZAN
Advertising Adviser
President Reagan called it the "Korean Air Lines massacre." The Soviet action in shooting down a Korean jet with 269 people aboard was a "murderous" and "barbarie" attack, he said.
A verbal assault
In the language used between nations, Reagan and his speech-writers used all the ammunition available. Those Soviets are murderers, he said in his address to the nation last night.
The sanctions included restrictions on scientific and cultural exchanges. The president also reaffirmed restrictions on Soviet airline flights into the country.
But although Reagan used up his arsenal of words, the list of concrete actions that the United States intends to take against the Soviet Union was notably small.
Reagan fortunately said that arms negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union would continue. To cancel such negotiations, as some far-right conservatives have suggested, would only widen the gap between the two sides. Already the United States and the
He played tapes of Soviet radio transmissions that were made immediately before and after the attack. The Soviet pilot shot down the jetliner with full knowledge that it was a civilian flight, Reagan said.
Soviet Union seem busy enough calling each other murderers and spies.
Reagan called throughout his speech for an explanation of the attack, and he legitimately asked other countries to help pressure the Soviets to provide one.
A U.S. reconnaissance plane had flown on a routine mission near the area of the attack, as Reagan acknowledged.
But the spy plane did land well before the time of the attack on the Korean jet. Also, the profiles of the spy plane and of the 747 are drastically different.
Two-hundred sixty nine people are presumed dead. An explanation and analysis of why the plane was shot down won't bring them back. But perhaps it will help prevent such a tragic incident from happening again.
Outstanding writer
It's official: James Gunn, KU professor of English, is one outstanding science fiction writer. In fact, he's one of the best in the world.
Yesterday, Gunn achieved what surely must be the highlight of his literary career, an honor few are fortunate enough even to compete for — he received the coveted Hugo Award for the best non-fiction book on science fiction.
Yet Gunn's success should come as no surprise at all to his many KU students and friends, long familiar with his enlightening classroom comments and large, important and popular body of published works. Also familiar is his work as director of KU's Center for the Study of Science Fiction and the Intensive Summer Institute for the Study of Science Fiction.
Such an accomplishment came as a surprise to Gunn, who said he "had a hard time believing it" as he made his way to the stage to receive the award at the World Science Fiction Convention in Baltimore. His book "Isaac Asimov: The Foundations of Science Fiction" brought him the Hugo.
Almost single-handedly, Gunn has made KU a leading center for the study and writing of science fiction. Through his work, KU has been honored by scores of compliments, citations and noted guest speakers. Doubless there will be more awards and benefits in the future.
So, officially: Congratulations. James Gunn.
A sunny California vacation apparently hasn't lessened President Reagan's deep paranoia that he leads a staff of traitors and subversives intent on leaking secrets to the media.
Reagan plugs away
Last week, in the form of what appears to be his most widespread and ridiculous memorandum yet, Reagan warned 2.6 million federal employees that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information could lead to criminal prosecution "where circumstances warrant."
The fact that the unauthorized disclosure of highly secret government documents could warrant criminal prosecution is not at all surprising. In fact, this position is the law of the land, and in most cases is certainly called for. Although definitions vary as to what constitutes national security, almost no one argues that a secure nation is vitally important.
What is the president saying here?
Is he implying that sometimes it is perfectly legitimate to reveal government secrets? Hardly. Rather, he is actually attempting to extend the limits of what constitutes a damaging leak by delegating himself, or his cronies, as the final judges on which circumstances warrant prosecution.
Since we can assume that every government employee expects bad things to happen when he leaks top secrets, we must look for another reason as to why Reagan sent the memo. That reason is found in the words "where circumstances warrant."
Fortunately, similar attempts by Reagan to restrict leaks to the media haven't succeeded, though they were never on such a large scale. This inane move should meet the same fate.
LETTERS POLICY
The University Daily Kanzen welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typewritten, double-space and should not exceed 300 words. They should include the writer's name, address and phone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, the letter should include his class and home town or faculty or staff position. The Kanzen group is also involved in submitting guest columns. Columns and letters can be mailed or brought to the Kanzen office, 111 Staffer-Fint Hall. The Kanzen reserves the right to edit or reject letters and columns.
Mexico faces financial woes after banking on oil wealth
Mexico is in deep trouble.
Three years ago, the country was ready to welcome prosperity with its oil wealth, but now it is reeling under economic chaos. The Mexican peso has been devalued by 1,200 percent since 1976, according to Mexican bank reports. Today the dollar is worth 150 pesos.
from government corruption and currency speculation to development programs, everything was calculated in barrels of oil."
Staff Columnist
writes Flavio Tavares in the August edition of World Press Review. But, in mid-182, as the international price of oil went down, Mexico's economic ills were revealed to the world.
Impoverished Mexico could not repay its foreign debt this year, and the United States granted Mexico $3 billion emergency credit, of which $1 billion was advance payment for Mexican oil.
For a, country that exported 2 million barrels of oil in 1982, it seemed easier to buy items than to manufacture them at home. Agricultural products and businessmen, with petrolidens, invested in stocks and real
Mexico has little else to export besides coffee, vegetables and a few manufactured goods — few alternatives to bolster its economy. Mexico now is paying for its heavy reliance on oil wealth in the past.
estate in other countries such as Switzerland, the United States and France instead of plowing it into Mexican industries. Hence, more Mexican money circulates abroad. The Mexican faces a stranded economy.
Recent data from Mexican financial circles indicate a $6 billion surplus from Mexican oil exports so far this year, but that isn't enough to pay $12 billion interest on loans for the same period.
And the country also will have to import more industrial parts to keep production and employment at present levels.
Moreover, Mexico has neglected agriculture. More grains will have to be imported to feed the nation
unemployment is another grim reality in Mexico, and thousands of peasants and workers flee the country every year to the greener pastures of the United States. That eases the unemployment problem somewhat, but emigrants are frequently officials to ship them out of the country to be underpaid on U.S. farms.
Mexico's present insolvency is not inexplicable, though. The country has been looted by past-government and labor officials. Officials now in office said that of the $85 billion Mexican foreign debt, about $40 billion had been misappropriated by Mexico's previous government.
Mexico invested the other half in oil-drilling equipment abroad that now uses useless. In 1977-78, approximately 317 million barrels of oil disappeared from the reserves of the state—responding to Mexican press reports. Jorge Diaz Serrano, former director of Pemex, explained that the oil had either evaporated or spilled. In June the Mexican government charged Diaz Serrano with defrauding Pemex of $34 million.
The oil glut in Mexico also spawned companies acting as intermediaries to buy oil-drilling equipment, and the firms thrived on
"From government corruption and currency speculation to development programs, everything was calculated in barrels of oil," writes Flavio Tavares in the August edition of World Press Review. But, in mid-1982, as the international price of oil went down, Mexico's economic ills were revealed to the world.
bribes and corruption. Smuggling tankers of oil and returning them empty also proved to be another successful business for corrupt officials.
President Miguel de la Madrid recently suggested legislation that would punish corrupt officials, but his proposal received a cool response from government office. And those who were caught with funds during the previous administration won't have to account for their deeds.
The government is still rife with corruption, but the country can take some steps to improve the economy. It must now mobilize industry, create jobs and boost unemployment to bring the country to a state of normality.
but as long as corruption co exists with development, Mexico won't be able to shake its economic troubles.
Record of retreat on rights
WASHINGTON — The Reagan administration's campaign to defend its civil rights record is a major challenge to divert attention from the facts.
In housing, the administration proclaims that it has conducted more than 60 "investigations" of discrimination. But the Justice Department's six new Fair Housing Act lawsuits since the administration took office.
In ways not widely noticed, the administration's record shows a wholesale retreat from the nation's bipartisan commitment to vigorous civil rights enforcement. This is particularly important in two fields where the administration has focused much of its recent publicity efforts.
In spite of its record, the administration has proposed "strengthening" the Fair Housing Act by giving more authority to the Justice Department. Small wonder that civil rights groups are skeptical, particularly since the proposal provides only fines and not additional remedies for victims of discrimination.
ELLIOT M. MINCBERG President of the Washington Council of Lawyers
Reagan opposes a bipartisan bill sponsored by Sen. Edward M Kennedy, D-Mass, and Sen Charles McC, Mathius, R-Maryland, which would strengthen administrative procedures and provide additional relief for victims of discrimination.
A Justice Department lawsuit filed July 11 against Alabama state officials charging racial segregation in the Alabama higher education system was the first new education case in two and a half years. The suit was filed only after a federal court ordered that action be taken against Alabama, after an inquiry by the United States Civil Rights Commission and after the Education Department referred the situation to the Justice Department more than 18 months ago.
Over the objections of its career attorneys, the Justice Department reversed previous administrations' positions and argued before the Supreme Court that the Internal Revenue Service could not deny tax exemptions to discriminatory private schools — an argument resoundingly rejected by the Supreme Court in its recent decision. Jones University United States University claim that it opposes only mandatory busing, the administration vetoed the Chicago voluntary-desegregation aid bill and opposed a voluntary desegregation plan for the St. Louis area.
The department's leadership has retreated dramatically from the rights enforcement policies of its Republican and Democratic predecessors. This retreat cannot be concealed by the administration's disingenuous effort to cloak its record in a mantle of principle opposition to busing and affirmative action. If you look carefully, you can see right through it — just like the emperor's new clothes.
Copyright 1983 the New York Times.
Self-defense under international law U.S. should not repeat policy of nonintervention
PERU, Vt. — Cuba and Nicaragua hint that they would be willing to stop sending men and arms to promote the rebellion in El Salvador if the United States agreed not to help the Salvadoran government put the rebellion down. Such an agreement would abolish the distinction between aggression and self-defense in international law and treat both as politically and morally equivalent. For the United States to embrace that proposition should be unthinkable.
The pattern of response to the illegal use of force has not always been effective, and in recent years it has become alarmingly ineffective.
With remarkable consistency, the modern rules of international law have been applied to hold a state liable for any use of force to attack the territorial integrity, political freedom, citizens, armed forces or other sovereign interest of another state.
The rules recognize the inherent right of "individual and collective self-defense" in peacetime — that is, the right of a state being attacked, and of states helping it, to use a limited, proportional amount of armed force if peaceful remedies are not available.
But the expectations and prescriptions of the law have long been
clear in the rulings of courts and arbitrators and in the conditioned reflexes of foreign offices and defense ministries. Thus, during Biafra's attempted secession from Nigeria, the world treated aid to Biafra as obviously illegal, while
EUGENE ROSTOW
Professor of Law and Public Affairs at Yale University
international military support for Nigeria was accepted as obviously proper.
Similarly, Libya's assistance to rebels against the government of Chad is universally considered aggression, whereas French and U.S. help to Chad's government is considered effective and don't confine the defense against the illegal use of force to parrying and repelling aggression
These rules of international law, reaffirmed in the United Nations Charter, reflect the nature of states and the conditions necessary for their cooperation. Many international commissions have attempted to establish exceptions to the rules in order to legitimize international use of force on behalf of causes to which particular states
are attached — notably "socialism." "national liberation" and "self-determination."
intervention" policy that assured destruction of the Spanish Republic.
One great advantage of basing our foreign policy explicitly on international law is the neutrality of the law. The rules of law on the international use of force rest on a policy of preserving the state system, in which every state has an equal and overwhelming interest.
in the Spanish Republic. Ironically, the leaders of Cuba and Nicaragua take a leaf from the book of Hitler and Mussolini: During the mid-1830s, Hitler and Mussolini sent military supplies and then troops to assist France's revolution. This was open engagement against Spain. The new nations were legally entitled to help Spain defend itself against the revolution but did not, hoping to appease Hitler and Mussolini.
All these efforts have failed for the same reason. No state will support a rule that might be invoked to restrict its right of collective self-defense to justify a guerrilla attack from a neighbor's territory against itself.
Savior knows Apart from the various applications of the Brezneh Doctrine, before which the West has stood mute, there has been only one deviation from the pattern of conduct sketched by these rules in modern times: the "non-
International law does not protect the status quo; it establishes procedures for encouraging peaceful change. It says nothing about the right of a people to revolt against tyranny. It deals only with the international use of force, and it protects Poland and East Germany as categorically as it protects El Salvador and South Korea.
The United States must not consider repeating the mistake it made by supporting the non-intervention policy for Spain. We should never again abandon the rules of international law that condemn aggression and uphold states' rights of individual and collective self-defense. The most fundamental goal of our foreign policy — achievement of a just, stable world order — will be beyond our reach until the rules on the international use of force are generally and reciprocally observed.
To throw the compass of a law overboard could hardly help the president and Congress navigate the turbulent waters of modern world
Copyright 1983 the New York Times