The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, April 05, 1983, Image 2

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

    Page 2/The Battalion/Tuesday, April 5,1983
opinion
Press ignoring Afghanistan?
by Maxwell Glen
and Cody Shearer
For spring break this year, two Ivy
Leaguers passed up the delights of Hil
ton Head, Ft. Lauderdale and Aspen for
a trip to no man’s land.
Gregory D’Elia, a Yale junior, and
Charles Bork, who graduated from Yale
in 1981, entered Afghanistan dressed as
refugees one month ago to prove that the
American press ignores the resistance by
anti-Soviet Afghan guerillas. Yet, while
the trip was illuminating, Bork and D’E
lia may have only dramatized how the
continuing conflict in South Asia frus
trates even the most aggressive of news
hounds.
On Feb. 26, Bork and D’Elia set off for
Rawalpindi. The two staff members of
the right-wing-minded Yale Free Press
had solicited $9,000 from various conser
vative think-tanks (Accuracy in Media,
Inc. and Fund for Objective News Re
porting, among others) early this year to
underwrite plane tickets, camera equip
ment and incidental expenses.
They eventually rendezvoused with
representatives of the Afghan resistance
— or Mujahideen — in Peshawar, a
Pakistani city about 40 miles from the
Khyber Pass. For the ever-necessary dis
guise, they purchased turbans, capes and
other local garb (one Mujahideen mem
ber blackened Bork’s blond beard with
dye and a toothbrush). It was then by bus
to a border refugee camp where, late one
afternoon, they crossed into Afghanistan
with the help of a guide.
Bork, 24, and D’Elia, 20, stayed in
Afghanistan’s Pektia province for Five
days, visiting a school for refugee chil
dren, surveying bombed-out villages and
farms and meeting other resistance sol
diers. They also took more than 1,000
photographs (Bork, who is a military
photography buff, hauled an antique
plate camera and tripod along).
The Yalies spent one day at a resist
ance center, where many Afghan nation
alists were gathering for a nighttime
assault on a government garrison two
miles away. “We were a little concerned
that this wasn’t the best place to be at that
moment,” admitted Bork, who added
that helicopter air attacks made the
sparsely-equipped Afghans vulnerable at
all times.
After two weeks in the region, Bork
and D’Elia concluded that American
news organizations were inadequately re
porting the Afghan story and need to
station full-time correspondents in
Peshawar.
Yet, Henry S. Bradsher, who has co
vered Afghanistan over the last 25 years
for the Associated Press, the now-
defunct Washington Star and the Lon-
don-based Economist, dismisses the news
bureau as an inadequate solution.
For one, he says, since the Soviet-
backed regime of Habrak Karmal
routinely denies Western journalists visas
or freedom of movement. Firsthand re
porting is irregular if not non-existent.
Most American editors must rely on the
secondhand reports from “diplomatic
sources” in Islamabad or New Delhi, or
Mujahideen representatives in Peshawar
— an unreliable system at best.
Secondly, the Afghan conflict’s hit-
and-run nature prevents reporters from
gathering much news. Bradsher, who re
cently authored a study of Soviet-Afghan
relations for the Duke University Press,
told our associate Michael Duffy that
“there are no ongoing battles to speak of.
Most reporters end up only with footage
of Afghans walking around the moun
tains or lobbying shells for amusement.”
Unfortunately, the news gap helps to
explain why Americans don’t follow
Afghan developments with much enthu
siasm. Indeed, a recent survey of public
attitudes toward U.S. foreign policy by
- the Chicago Council on Foreign Rela
tions overlooked questions about Afgha
nistan; other polls have shown that the
issue faded from the public interest with
in 10 months of the December 1979 inva
sion.
Though neither Bork nor D’Elia
thought that their trip would single-
handedly improve U.S. coverage, each
believes that more regular reportage,
particularly by television crews, could
mobilize public opinion against Soviet
adventurism.
For the plucky pair at Yale, however,
the lesson of their unorthodox spring
break may be that the news media are
doing the best job under the circumst
ances. While editors choose to ignore
most Afghan-related dispatches, no con
spiracy exists to spike the story, as some
of Bork’s and D’Elia’s benefactors might
believe.
THE SET'S FINE NOW, BUT I HM)
TO REMOVE. LOT OF THE STATIONS.
PONT WORRY THOUGH , lOOR BILL
EACH r^ONTH WON'T CHAN6E...
i'
•O
to
£
#
©
Letters: Use of photo criticized
Editor:
The photograph of the female cadet
playing the tuba which appeared on the
front page of Friday’s edition of The Bat
talion, and the oh-so-cute caption which
accompanied it, only served to re
emphasize that your publication is in
deed the “lap dog of the administration.”
Your attempt to make light of the fact
that the Fightin’ Texas Aggie Band re
fuses to break sacred tradition and allow
qualified women into its ranks fell flat.
That you would condone a federally
funded organization’s chauvinistic and
blatantly illegal exclusionary practice is
not only demeaning to your publication,
but to the women who attend this Univer
sity as well.
I cannot believe that it was meant to be
an attempt at subtle satire. The recent
publication of The Aggie Rag demons
trated that you are incapable of blatant
satire.
Who does your publication cater to,
the administration or the student .body?
Unfortunately, there are too many peo
ple on this campus who found the photo
graph and caption amusing, and it is ex
actly this sort of thinking which impedes
any attempts, to make this University
great.
It would have been nice if you hadn’t
had to add the last two words to the cap
tion. It would have made your homage to
The Battalion, which appeared in the
same issue’s weekend supplement, easier
to stomach if you had left the whole thing
out all together.
Michelle Lynch ’83
Critique continued
Editor:
Is there no limit to your insensitivity?
Your shocking front page photo and cap
tion in the April 1 edition, passed off as
an April Fool joke, constitute your active
support for the illegal and immoral dis
crimination against women on this cam
pus. Instead of Fighting for social equal
ity, you seem content to bless us with in
spiring news about ring sales and dance
attendance.
Your avoidance of controversy at all
cost is particularly galling in light of the
disgustingly self-congratulatory At Ease
in the same issue. How ironic that in the
same article that hails The Battalion as
being “among the top 10 percent in quali
ty of university newspapers,” we Find the
mathematically startling information
that by increasing from eight to 80 week
ly pages the paper “quadrupled in size.”
No wonder you can’t put two and two
together.
I have no objection to your use (three
times, no less!) of the British spelling of
the word “humor.” You’re just helping
make this a world university, right? And I
loved your incisive analysis of Slouch who
“has become less subtle and less rough
around the issues,” whatever that means.
But you forgot to finish the cover title.
It should have read, How The Battalion
Is Produced ... Poorly.
Michael Halpern
Thanks
Editor:
To the fella in fencing 199 Tuesday
and Thursday from 10:15 a.m. to 10:45
a.m. — thanks. You are a special person.
I really appreciate your honesty in turn
ing in the diamond earring I lost in the
class before yours. I do not know who you
are but thanks so much for being honest.
You are a good Ag!
Shera Wasilewsky
Mobiltown Dr.
Slouch By Jim Earl
“I was afraid that you might not have had a chance to
celebrate and enjoy the festivities on April
by !
Compromise: Wort
meaning survival
The
flirma
iop U
Iminisi
iop is
]ual er
eand
prions
erald 1
by Arnold Sawislak
United Press International
ke actii
WASHINGTON — The cliche about
politics is that it is “the art of the possi
ble.” The trick for politicians who prac
tice that art is to make it appear as if they
have accomplished the impossible.
Ronald Reagan demonstrated on both
the jobs bill and the Social Security rescue
legislation that he understands “the art of
the possible” means compromise. 1 le also
showed that he can make a deal he has cut
with his opponents look like uncondi
tional victory for himself.
The jobs measure Reagan accepted
was almost the same bill he denounced as
a “pork barrel” full of “make work” jobs a
few months ago. The Social Security
legislation carried tax increases that the
president said last year were unaccept
able.
But when Congress passed both bills,
Reagan praised the lawmakers for rising
above partisanship and demogoguery
and declared that his promise to protect
the needy had been fulFilled. Against all
odds, it seemed, the president had come
through again.
The plain truth was that both bills had
elements distasteful to Reagan and his
Democratic opponents, but neither side
could pass the kind of legislation it pre
ferred.
Unemployment was rising, Social
Security was headed toward deFicit, and
the 1982 elections gave no smashing
mandate to either side. It looked like a
continued standoff would only make
things worse for the public in 1983 and
the politicians in 1984, so the politicians
compromised.
Now the battle moves on to the budget,
with the focus on defense spending. The
president wants to increase it ataStjo not
percent; the Democrats in contrdtiiik pro|
I louse passed a budget with anir cor
of 4 percent. Republican leadedil ! T st<
Senate are said to be thinkingabouI ^ ie
neighborhood of 7 percent for di
If the difference were split,thei
yvould be 5.5 percent. But it
surprise if the final figure is dose!
percent, which Reagan could poinii iom a u
victory, given the House action. I
That does not mean thatthepral
will have had the better of his fo«. Ir
House budget tilso has restoredfutl| /
for a number of social programssiq
food stamps and legal services
poor that the Democrats wanttopn
They might give a little on
spending to achieve that.
I hat leaves taxes as an obstacle
Democrats favor repeal of the taxed
this summer to reduce the
plus deficit. The president alsois«
by the deficit, but he is lashedtotliti
on a 1983 tax cut.
But there still might be room for
promise. The tax cut is duejulvl
considerable nick could be madein
deficit by delaying it until, say, Dec.
Or Reagan might be able to save
tax cut by agreeing to delay,theeim
lion of “bracket creep” from theii
Dick
wnsel'
irChr
•day
eak o
ad be
dps.
“Le
)nal rc
tax structure, now scheduled for 11 ents)
'eates!
ive,” ]
ie\
deficits still are running high.
Both sides can be expectedtosay' ar t re
er” on these possibilities now. Bui eve '°l
body will look good in abudgetsiau la ^ c '
and both Reagan and his opponenld
shown they can deal with each»1^^ '
when it becomes necessary. luteac
As the heat rises in Washington I lot e
summer, the art form calledcomprnphis. ’
might start looking attractiveonceatI Pun
Ihan a
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
Member <>l
Texas t’ress Association
Soul It west journalism ('.onterence
Editor Diana Sullen fuss
Managing Editor Gary Barker
Associate Editor Denise Richter
City Editor Hope E. Paasch
Assistant City Editor Beverly Hamilton
Sports Editor John Wagner
Assistant Sports Editor John Lopez
Entertainment Editor Colette Hutchings
Assistant Entertainment Editor... . Diane Yount
News Editors Daran Bishop, Brian Boyer,
Jennifer Carr, Elaine Engstrom,
Shelley Hoekstra, Johna Jo Maurer,
Jan Werner, Rebeca Zimmermann
Staff Writers
Melissa Adair, Maureen Carmody,
Frank Christlieb, Connie Edelmon,
Patrice Koranek, Robert
McClohon, Ann Ramsbottom, Kim
Schmidt, Patti Schwierzke, Kelley
Smith, Angel Stokes, Joe Tindel,
Kathy Wiesepape
Copyeditor Jan Swatter
Cartoonist Scott McCullar
Graphic Artists Pam Starasinic
Sergio Galvez Thompson, Fernando
Andrade
Photographers David Fisher, City Hood,
Eric Lee, Irene Mees,
William Schulz
Editorial Policy
I'hc lliidiilion is a non-orofii. scll-sunnoi liiw ncus-
p.ipcr operated as a eommunit} service la Tcxn^
Universin and Iir\an-College Station. Opim 01
pressed in I he lialtalinn are those ot lhcctliltit^
anthnt. and do not net essarih represent the
l exas \XM l’ni\etsit\ administrators 01 hitulHf
hers, or o! the Hoard ol Keifeols.
I he Battalion also seis es as a lahoralon
lot students in repnrtinff. editinpandplioWfjn^'
ses within the Dcpat intent ol CVtiiiimi/iK.'illi®
Questions <>i eomnients conccrniii/,'M
mattei should he dit eeled to the editor.
Letters Policy
Let lets to the Ltliloi should nut exceed WIDwrf
length, and at e subject to being nil il llti'vim'W
The editorial stall reserves the right lociiilIcj® taiitly
stvle and length, but will make everv ctToil Rhers
the author's intent. Lath letter ttitisi also lx sip^:
show the address and phone number oi lin'
Columns and guest editorials are alsondwiif 1 ™.
arc not subject to the same length eoiisliitiittsasl'* e t /'
Address all inquiries and corrcspomleiKC lo:,w "IScus
I lie Battalion, 210 Reed McDonald, Texas .U'Mt
vcrsilv. College Station, LX 778Ti, or |)honi'(T
2011.
I he Battalion is published daily (lui'ingTtoas.V
tall and spring semesters, except iorliolklavaiKltV *31(1. ^
nation periods. Mail snhscriptionsare$l(u3|W^ Whatj-
tet, $8:1.2”) per school vear and S.'la per hdlyoar..^
tising rates Furnished on request.
Our address: I he Battalion, 2l(i Real Md^ r '
Building. Texas A&M Lhiiversitv, CollegeStalW
7784:1. '
United Press International is entitled cxdiiW*
the use lot reproduction ol all news(lispiltdtcid^ j^a
toil. Rights of reproduction of all other matlcfW f '
reserved.
Second class postage paid at College Slali*
77843.
ion.”
We<
If s
H’hy cc
5n a'
is.m 3 hii(i
ander
their i
e sai
AC
lieWl
s peak
f Se
for oi
%"h
'ntiiq;