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