Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 18, 1983)
Page 2/The Battalion/Monday, April 18, 1983 opinion Prospects for negotiations by Maxwell Glen and Cody Shearer Cuban officials responded with wry and wistful detachment to last week’s calls for U.S.-Cuban talks over growing tensions in Central America. Pragmatic as negotiations sound, the Cubans said, appeals by elder statesmen from the U.S. and several Latin Amer ican countries probably won’t bear fruit. Indeed, interviews with several members of Fidel Castro’s inner circle reveal that the common cause needed for negotia tions seems non-existent. As a result, the warring factions in El Salvador and Nicaragua may be forced to resolve their differences to the last man. Of course, the appeal for a “many- sided dialogue” — issued April 5 by a group of prominent citizens including banker David Rockefeller, former secre taries of state Cyrus Vance and Edmund Muskie, and former officials from Argentina and Mexico — seemed to come at a critical juncture. Cuban-backed guerrillas have been mounting a new offensive in El Salvador while U.S.- backed rebels have been challenging the Sandinist government in Nicaragua. Both Havana and Washington have be gun to worry that their clients will draw them into larger, unwanted conflicts. Stressing themes of non-intervention and respect for national sovereignty, the private group suggested that negotiation “should begin among the governments of Central America, their opposition movements, the U.S., Cuba and the Soviet Union ... to explore whether the vital interests of each of the parties can be safeguarded without continuing war in Central America.” Yet, when we made the same sugges tion last Thursday to Ricardo Alarcon, Cuba’s vice minister for foreign affairs, he said such talks would yield too little, too late, if anything. Alarcon said that while talks might have been useful to Cuba a year ago when Salvadoran troops were on the offensive, “Now we must wait.” Recent events, he said, indicate the FMLN guerrilla forces in El Salvador would “inevitably” prove victorious, perhaps “within a year.” lii this light, negotiations are no longer squarely in the interest of Cuba or its allies in El Salvador’s countryside. Alarcon feared that a negotiated set tlement would be as improbable as the talking points would be vague. A former head of Castro’s Havana undergrourid during the 1958 Cuban revolution, Alar con contended that negotiations would only help the Reagan administration “persuade people that it’s not only think ing in military terms.” Cuba’s intrasigence, unfortunately, is compounded by an equally-reluctant U.S. posture. According to American di plomats here, the Reagan administration isn’t interested in sitting down with the Cubans — or their allies in Nicaragua and El Salvador. They say that Cuba’s repeated snubbing of U.S. overtures has left Washington cool to the idea. But, as The New York Times revealed last week, negotiations are generally anathema to U.S. policymakers. The Times disclosed an April 1982 National Security Council document on Central America which stipulated stepped-up efforts to “isolate” Nicaragua and Cuba and “to avoid congressionally-mandated negotiations, which would work against our interests.” Further deflating the prospect for cooperation was the postponement last week of a regional summit scheduled for May. Costa Rica, Honduras, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala said that talks at present would serve no useful pur pose. Few, if any, parties involved in Cen tral America are willing to work out their differences amicably. Does this mean that negotiations are hopeless? Not necessarily. Incursions by U.S.-backed anti-Sandinist forces have added an ironic new twist to the region’s affairs. Ronald Reagan stands to lose as much political prestige at home as Fidel Castro’s allies may lose in territory. The president might find Nicaragua the best place to start lowering the region’s tem perature. Yet, on balance, the lines have been drawn too deeply and for too long to expect a mutually constructive give-and- take. Teh forces which favor military solutions simply outnumber those that believe in peaceful means. Even where there may be room for creative initiative, machismo will take precedence over the interests of peace. Letters: Changing Corps of Cadets Editor: After four difficult but rewarding years in the Corps of Cadets, I have ex perienced Final Review for the last time. It’s sad leaving Texas A&M after all the good times I’ve had here, but I’ve got a challenging future ahead of me that I’m looking forward to. I am a third generation Aggie, a fact of which I am very proud. My grandmother graduated from A&M in 1927. After a 30 year Army career, she retired as a lieute nant general. My mother graduated in 1948 and she became an F-86 Sabre pilot in the Korean War. She shot down five MiGs and became an ace. When I joined the Corps in 1979,1 was determined to do whatever I could to remind those men that the Corps is a woman’s place. That year was the first time male seniors were allowed to wear Aggie boots. “No boobs, no boots,” I used to say to them. But now men in boots are no longer an issue. Women in the Corps accept men in boots without question. This acceptance bewilders good Ags like me. During my four years in the Corps, I have seen more acceptance of the “bag gies” by the women. This used to distress me very much, but not any more because of a traumatic thing that happened to me during spring break. accidently cut his finger with a carving knife and bled on his apron. I couldn’t talk my brother out of it, either. I told him that men in the Corps are all amazons. I told him how disgust ing men in the Corps are for never shav ing their legs. But he wouldn’t listen to me. So my own brother is going to be a baggie. He’ll be in that men’s outfit over in the Brigade. There are still some good of Ags like me in the Corps who ref use to accept the baggies. Well, that’s fine. But let me tell you something, ladies. You can pick on somebody else’s baggie, but NOT MINE, by God! You creeps had better leave my little brother alone! Many changes have occurred in the Aggie Corps over the years which shock my mother and grandmother. They re member when men were first admitted to A&M in the 1960s. They felt A&M was surely going to the dogs. But the real shocker came in 1974 when men were allowed in the Corps. “MEN in the Corps? Blasphemy!” they gasped. But alas, it was so. My little brother, a high school senior, told me he is joining the Corps next fall. I nearly vomited from shock. I ran into the living room in rage and begged my mother to stop him. She said she couldn’t because she and Father already had a terrible fight over it. Father just wouldn’t give in. He rarely disagrees with my mother, but he put his foot down this time. He was so upset with Mother, he Lisa Turner ’83 Phone calls threaten Editor: I am writing this letter to the student body of Texas A&M about a letter writ ten by my roommate, Mr. Kevin John son. He has spoken out about an activity at the University that is degrading to him and many other Ags. He spoke out as an exercise of his freedom of speech and also as a good Ag. Because of his letter he has been re ceiving threatening phone calls from “Norma G. Crocker.” If this is what the University calls good Ags, maybe they should let everybody know before hand. If being a good Ag means no right to freedom of speech without threats, I want no part of it. P.S. The name has changed but the auction block’s the same. T. L. Vance Kenneth Lilly the small society by Brickman THAT {PlJfZ ££>MPAr4Y f^ PL &T&LY * • • M/feC? A &(Z3AP IH T&PAY — <£)1981 King Features Syndicate, Inc. World rights reserved. Slouch By Jim Bail “Zi’s not a bad idea, it’s just that I think it would be easier to give up smoking.” Hospitals’, conflict of by Art Buchwald I worry about doctors. Not all doctors. But just the ones who have investments in private hospitals. The reason I worry ab out them is that when you’re a stockhol der in a hospital you might have a conflict of interest between doing what is right for the patient, and what is good for the corporation. Dr. Wesley Heights, who owns a piece of the Kidney Stone Memorial Hospital, told me he saw no ethical problem in a doctor investing his money in a private hospital. “Doctors should own hospitals,” he said. “Then they can personally see that their patients get the best treatment money can buy.” “But some people argue,” I said, “that if a doctor has a financial interest in a medical facility he may subconsciously hospitalize people, just to keep the occu pancy rate up.” “That’s ridiculous,” Dr. Heights said. “I’ve never put a patient in Kidney Stone Memorial unless he absolutely needed to be there. The Board of Directors does not pressure me to send them patients. Asa matter of fact, I don’t even put all my sick people in Kidney Stone. I send many of them to the Sisters of Mercy, which is a nonprofit hospital.” “How do you decide?” “It’s strictly a medical decision. If they have a good health insurance plan, I put them in Kidney Stone. If they don’t, I find them a bed at Sisters of Mercy.” “Sisters of Mercy must be thrilled to get all your indigent patients.” “They probably would like more who can pay their way, but Kidney Stone Memorial’s computers are not set up to handle non-insured patients, while Sis ters of Mercy has been doing it for years. So I know when I send a destitute patient to Sisters he’ll get much better treatment than he would at Kidney Stone.” “Will Kidney Stone take a non-insured person?” “Of course we will if it’s a life or death situation. But as a profit-making hospital we owe it to our stockholders to make doctors interest This Scon Tex; renll othe sure our loss-per-bed isheldtoi mum. Some people have accused trying to put the nonprofithospic of business. This is not true.Ii them as much as they need us. fh “Why do they need you?" _ “Because we take the burden of® by providing services for peophlB , af ford them. If we didn’t takettif® tients, they wouldn’t be abletoa f| m date the non-paying patientsiff [r need hospital care.” But “I guess what troubles me isiHlel ai idea of private hospitals, butthett» ties that doctors own stock in lhemB u doesn’t bother you?” ||1k “On the contrary. Medical®' should own a piece of the hospitB (:( put their patients in. Who know['jU now to keep costs down, andmai®J the institution is being run aiafM si| Private hospital employees areo[|j lm toes because they know we’rewill so them as carefully as we’re watcliB patients. What makes Kidneyw great hospital is that our doctors'I about the bottom line.” “I guess that’s the only thingvoil to worry about,” I said. “What the heck does thatniear| “If you worry about the boiio:! and your patient, you could hare* flict in medical judgement.” “The patient always conies fol Heights said angrily. “Idon’tkfl doctor at Kidney Stone who haseittl a client there longer than wasatel necessary, unless it was a niceM* and no one was waiting for the w “You don’t have to get sore.’ “When I graduated from school I tookanoaththatlwouldtl patients alike whether they Cross, Group Health or Medical; never violated that oath. Asa fact, since I became owner in Stone Memorial, I’ve been able: I medical care not only fromthepl viewpoint but also from the ders’. This has made meabetterl and richer for the experience." I The Battalion USES 045 360 Member ot Texas Press Association , Southwest Journalism Conference Editor ' Diana Sultenfuss Managing Editor Gary Barker Associate Editor Denise Richter City Editor Hope E. Paasch Assistant City Editor Beverly Hamilton Sports Editor Jot 111 Wagner Assistant Sports Editor J°hn 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 Swaner, Jan Werner, Rebeca Zimmermann Staff Writers Melissa Adair, Maureen Carmody, Frank Christlieb, Connie Edelmon, Scott Griffin, Patrice Koranek, Robert McGlohon, Ann Ramsbottom, Kim Schmidt, Karen Schrimsher, Patti Schwierzke, Kelley Smith, Angel Stokes, Joe Tindel, Tracey Taylor, Kathy Wiesepape Cartoonist Scott McCullar Graphic Artists Pam Starasinic Sergio Galvez Thompson, Fernando Andrade Photographers David Fisher, Guy Hood, Eric Lee, Irene Mees, Barry Papke, William Schulz Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting news paper operated as a community serviceloW\ University and Bryan-College Station. Of'-j pressed in The Battalion are those of the eio\ author-, and do not necessarily representl/it'Sj I'exas A&M University administrators or lv : l hers, or of the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratot) for students in reporting, edilingandphoiof•■ I scs within the Department of Communiaw* L Questions or comments concerning W1 matter should be directed to the editor. Letters Policy Letters to the Editor should not exceed! 1 "] length, and arc subject to being cut if tlitp^l The editorial staff reserves the right toedii^E style anti length, hut will make every effort 11 !*® the author’s intent. Each letter must alsoltfVjy show the address and phone numberoflff 11 * Columns and guest editorials are also are not subject to the same length constraints^ Address till inquiries and correspondent*C The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas versity. College Station, TX 77843,or phontl ' , 2611. The Battalion is published daily duringTt'* f all and spring semesters, except for holida' 11 ®: nation periods. Mail subscriptionsare$l6.ISf ff j ter, $.'E3.2. r > per school year and $35 perfulh*’ using rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed Building, Texas AX.-M University, CollegeSt- 77843. United Press International is entitledextn the use f or reproduction of all news dispatd |# 'T| to it. Rights of reproduction of all otherna^ ; reserved. Second class postage paid at College R'-'V 77843. ■