The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, February 29, 1980, Image 2

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Slouch
by Jim Earle
“/guess it's fair to say that Spring has officially arrived. ”
Opinion
U. S. halting own downfall
Sen. Henry Jackson’s Senate subcommittee on gov
ernmental affairs opened hearings on ways of keeping vital
defense technology out of Soviet hands, with Jackson declar
ing: “What we haven’t sold, we have given away in educa
tional, governmental and commerical technical exchange
programs. What we haven’t sold or given away, they have
stolen.’’
American-supplied computers were used to build milit
ary trucks. Subsequently some of the trucks were used in
the invasion of Afghanistan.
|| A dismaying tholight, isn’t it — that the United States
g could be helping to finance its own demise, and that of the
whole free world?
We see now, as we should have suspected all along, that
the Soviets were buying — or stealing — our technology and
laughing up their sleeves at us. The Yankees — always so
trusting, so naive! What a joke on them, using trucks to
helped build to subjugate a country whose independence
they value.
Jimmy Carter, finally understanding how far his trust had
been betrayed, has tightened controls on technology ex
ports to the Soviets. Yet more must be done.
Almost certainly some products will slip through — if only
because, as the Soviets perpetually remind us, they are not
above expropriation (their word for “theft ”). We must do our
best to make sure they get nothing from us the easy way.
The Dallas Morning News
the small society by Brickman
The Battalion
U S P S 045 360
LETTERS POLICY
l^'tttrs to the editor should not exceed 3(X) u ttrds and are
subject to heint> cut to that length or less if longer flu
editorial staff reserves the right to edit such lettirs and does
not guarantee to publish anij letter Each letter must he
signed, show the address of the writer and list a telephone
number for verification
Address correspondence to Li'tttrs to the Editor. The
Battalion. Boom 216. Reed McDonald Building. College
Station. Texas 77643
Represented nationally by National Educational Adver
tising Services. Inc.. New York City. Chicago and Los
Angeles.
The Battalion is published Monday throng)) Fridas from
September through May except during exam and holiday
x*riods and the summer, when it is published on Tuesday
hrough Thursday.
Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per semester $33.25 per
school year. $35.00 per full year. Advertising rates furnished
on request. Address: The Battalion. Room 216. Reed
McDonald Building. College Station. Texas 77843.
United Press International is entitled exclusively to the
use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it.
Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein reserved.
Second-Class postage paid at College Station. TX 77843
MEMBER
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Congress
Editor Roy Bragg
Associate Editor Keith Taylor
News Editor Rusty Cawley
Asst. News Editor Karen Cornelison
Copy Editor Dillard Stone
Sports Editor Mike Burrichter
Focus Editor Rhonda Watters
City Editor Louie Arthur
Campus Editor Diane Blake
Staff Writers Nancy Andersen,
Tricia Brunhart, Angelique Copeland,
Laura Cortez, Meril Edwards,
Carol Hancock, Kathleen McElroy,
Debbie Nelson, Richard Oliver,
Tim Sager, Steve Sisney,
Becky Swanson, Andy Williams
Chief Photographer Lynn Blanco
Photographers Lee Roy Leschper,
Paul Childress, Ed Cunnius,
Steve Clark
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are
those of the editor or of the writer of the
article and are not necessarily those of the
University administration or the Board of
Regents. 1 he Battalion is a non-profit, self-
supporting enterprise operated by students
as a university and community newspaper.
Editorial policy is determined by the editor.
Viewpoint
The Battalion
Texas A&M University
Friday
February 29, 1980
<
French,West German leaders
By
disagree with Carter’s method
Student:
tu dent C
oust'
tom
By ADALBERT DE SEGONZAC
The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan has
provoked differences between the United
States and its two most powerful West
European friends, France and West Ger
many. But what Americans may misunder
stand is that the French and West German
leaders disagree with President Carter’s
methods rather than with his objectives.
In other words, both French President
Valery Giscard d’Estaing and West Ger
man Chancellor Helmut Schmidt share
Carter’s concern for the dangers to peace
created by Soviet expansionism. They be
lieve, however, that Carter is pursuing the
wrong strategy by threatening action that
he may not be able to carry out.
Moreover, they feel that Carter’s bel
ligerent new posture could jeopardize their
own interests, which require a continua
tion of detente with the Russians.
Thus, while they publicly condemn
Soviet behavior, Giscard and Schmidt are
persuaded that a more effective approach
to the crisis is to maintain a dialogue with
the Kremlin.
At the same time, though, they consider
that their lack of enthusiasm for the so-
called Carter Doctrine in no way dilutes
their alliance with the United States, which
is the basis of their foreign policy.
This mixture of attitudes is subtle and
complicated, and it seems to me that it
requires a more careful explanation than
that contained in many American press
comments.
In the first place, the suggestion that
France and West Germany do not support
the United States is unsubstantiated by the
evidence. They have strongly denounced
Moscow, and even though France in parti
cular opposes an embargo, it has no inten
tion of bypassing the Carter administration
by selling wheat to the Soviet Union.
Moreover, the public in both countries is
overwhelmingly sympathetic to the firm
new mood in America, representing as it
does a welcome change from the years of
uncertainty that followed the Vietnam war
and the Watergate scandals.
Nevertheless, there is a pervasive feel
ing in France as well as in West Germany
that President Carter, who has long been
viewed as inexperienced and indecisive, is
displaying more emotion than rationality in
the present situation.
In part, too, many people here hold the
view that Carter’s past wooliness may have
indirectly encouraged the Russians to esti
mate that they could intervene in Afghanis
tan wih impunity. It is no secret, for exam
ple, that Schimdt privately expressed dis
may at Carter’s naive admission that the
Soviet move had taught him a lesson.
The French and West Germans were
further upset that Carter did not consult
them in advance of his decision to adopt a
tough line toward the Krelin. Equally con
fusing to them is the fact that the President
has not been specific about his plans to
draw the line against a Soviet thrust into
the Persian Gulf area.
These doubts are heightened, above all,
by an awareness on the part of West Eur-
poeans that they would be especially vul
nerable in the event that a conflict erupted
between the United States and the Soviet
Union. The current tensions also worry
them because of their economic relations
with the Russians and East Europeans.
Western Europe’s economic success
within recent years has been largely due to
the opening of markets for its industrial
goods in the Soviet Union and Eastern
Europe. Last year, for instance, French
exports to the Soviet Union rose 42 per
cent, and the prospects for future trade are
good.
Giscard, who is running for reelection
next year, is inspired as well by political
motives. His ruling majority depends on
the backing of the Gaullists, who as
claimants to the legacy of General Charles
de Gaulle, insist that French policy be in
dependent from that of the United States.
The West Germans, who also have lucra
tive economic links with the Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe, are even more sensi
tive to the risks of confrontations. Among
other things, they fear that a return to the
spirit of the cold war may trigger another
Berlin crisis and wreck their ties with East
Germany, which have dramatically im
proved lately.
Schmidt’s Social Democratic party is
currently waging an election campaign
against conservative adversaries who con
tend that detente has been an “illusion. ”
Schmidt realizes, therefore, that renewed
tioifid hav
■noteb
t the mic:
Beginnii
friction with the Soviet Union ; sS( ? rs ar !
his domestic foes. P
Underlying this outlook, me light —
the apprehension shared k>p| hke
Schmidt that Europe cannotaffos^ Dr I '<
of superpower rivalries, tejr oi civil
they object to U.S. decisions It :fcorclian
lated without them. They also . ;Sayiaks:
they can play individual roles»; allege pi
alliance. Btern ar
me, he p
Giscard, for instance, belit^ n |essee
France can curb Soviet infliM;! i n pjttsl
and he has demonstrated thatt jgoQ^ Sa'
deploying F’rench forces in pb nqdevari
and Tunisia. He claims }
for Indian Prime Minsiteryir t i e0 pi e w [
recent criticism of the Russians. “i’ ni g 0!
In Discard’s opinion, tliel. ren t CO i
alliance can best be servedbymiii
dialogue with the Kremlin. Fir)
West Germany, he holds, canp
function — but, he tells visit*|
they “keep cool.”
The aim of all this is to compels
Union to yield, without resortiiijlj
So, in a sense, Giscard and!
to think thathey candoforPrf
what he cannot do for himsett
That could be an ambitiousd
mirrors their belief that, how
guided Carter may be, theyramd
United States and so defendAmr Watch:
terests along with their own. unday a
(Segonzac, former Washinfta Televi
pondent for France-Soir, writes lent ral
rent affairs in France inity to
'atching
Spouse
re vent
mied a:
lhannel
jlleen £
teas tha
The 12
sting o
VO part:
«ns dire
re vent
Part 01
sal visio:
f side v
Viewe
■■vers;
said,
pot th
The- te
ireenin
irdUni'
ttd Dr.
rant fre
fevent
Althoi
ind in T
f studei
nd rear
on in s
lorth C
Texas
ess Pr<
aidalth
rr a pr
iilure tc
he vie
‘Ilk maiden ladie’ allowed to speal
freely on extra day in February
ee an e
Huge
By DICK WEST
United Press International
For good or bad, 1980 may be the end of
Leap Year as we have known it since the
Middle Ages. Think back a moment to
1288.
In that auspicious year, according to the
National Geographic Society, the Scottish
parliament approved legislation worded
thusly:
“It is statut and ordaint that for ilk yeare
known as lepe yeare, ilk maiden ladie, of
baith highe and lowe estait, shall hae liber-
tie to bespeke ye man she likes. ”
The Geographic does not give us what
lawmakers call the “legislative history’’ of
that particular milestone in civil liberties.
It is, however, fairly easy to reconstruct the
circumstances in which the Scottish parlia
ment acted.
It may be assumed that ilk maiden ladie
was getting fed up with waiting around for
ye man to bespeke himself. And so the
women’s liberation movement was born.
As we know, progress in civil liberties is
not accomplished by taking rights away
from Group A and handing them over to
Group B. Rather, Group B is accommo
dated by expanding the area in which a
right may be exercised.
Had the parliament moved to deprive ye
men of Scotland of some of their bespeking
days by assigning them to ilk maiden ladies,
chances are the legislation would have died
on the vine.
But as luck would have it, another ave
nue was open. The Leap Year adjustment
that Julius Caesar had made in the calendar
about 45 B.C. afforded an opportunity to
even things up between the sexes.
So, by act of parliament, ye men retained
the right to bespeke 365 days every year
and ilk maiden ladies were given libertie to
bespeke every fourth yeare on a day ye men
probably weren’t using anyhow.
The new system of equality evidentally
worked pretty well. It soon spread to
France and Italy and by 1600 had been
incorporated into English common law.
But some ilk maiden ladies are never satis
fied.
Subsequent unrest possibly could have
been avoided by again revising the calen
dar so that ilk maiden ladies wotiP
bespeking days in September, Ap'P
and November as well as Febiill
If such a compromise was coisr
however, it didn’t get very far.®
packing in the Middle AgesmaybB
as repugnant as courtpacking pro'®
to be. In any event the calendarr4
as is, and the Equal Rights AmfJI
subsequently came into being. [
The upshot is that this may be A
Feb. 29 with sexist connotations*
ERA is ratified by the 1982 dead.::
no longer will be any restriction
maiden ladie bespeking.
For truly liberated women, even I
Leap Year.
THOTZ
1 THINK IT'5 TlML TO \
, RETURN TO 1
\ TjCU AXHOOTTOM/
sTHIS
\ 0 4kozmik x
n\ ( GCA/U^-15IT
_A IS ABOUT
3 1DD...
I'M <0LAD THLV
REFUMDEB IT ALL .. .
By Doug Gm