The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, September 17, 1985, Image 2
Page 2/The Battalion/Tuesday, September 17, 1985 ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Opinion Library shuttle a good crutch The new library shuttle between the Sterling C. Evans Li brary and 17 libraries in the Austin area provides a wonderful opportunity for Texas A&M students and faculty. But it shouldn’t be a permanent solution. The service will help silence the complaints about the inade quacy of the Evans Library collection. Researchers now have ac cess to materials far beyond the shelves of our library and the demand for better resource availability from the College of Lib eral Arts can be met. The shuttle makes its run every Thursday and costs $8 — a small price to pay for the services it makes available. The prob lem is the bus leaves Parking Annex 34 at 7 a.m. and doesn’t leave Austin until 5 p.m., which may not be convenient when in formation is needed quickly. The new service won’t cover up the shortcomings of our li brary, but it should compensate for them temporarily. Our li brary’s lack of research materials has been an ongoing problem which the shuttle will help alleviate but not solve. The shuttle should serve as a crutch until the Evans Library has the funding and the materials to stand on its own feet. The Battalion Editorial Board rosh tight seci on halted t> saved d c “death Its “We h coming L you, it y we woulc said Cap jlexas D Ramsey I i On Su iboard se< Ipublic toi [where n [locked h dock. Warde mards sc fining °i IS,000 in MAQGUUK ©W0* HOKTOtl United Feature Syndicate ‘Hallett’s Nuclear Primer’ for upcoming summit bloody gt eight pns s Howev /olvemen inmate ra ‘that may officials Sc Rarnse; 'haler sa elations biggest p •unning i lates. It’s Parson; ind Rams num-seci feosharon Iblace at I) With the summit conference be tween President Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev slated for later this fall, the debate over nuclear weapons and “Star Wars” will be in the head lines once again. I considered writing egy in the U.S. is between the propo nents of Deterrence and Deterrence Plus. Deterrence proponents believe nu clear weapons are useful only as a deter rent. John Halieft a column on nuclear issues that will be discussed in the upcoming weeks, but I realized many people wouldn’t know what I was talking about. Instead, what follows is a “nuclear primer,” to help prepare everyone for the onslaught of news about to hit the stands. I’ll avoid taking sides because the purpose is not to influence or sway opinion but to provide people, espe cially those not familiar with nuclear is sues, with a basic glossary of terms. Deterrence— is, according to the New College Edition of the American Heritage Dictionary, the “measures taken by a state or an alliance of states to prevent hostile action by another state.” Presently the debate over nuclear strat- Deterrence Plus — is, according to Donald M. Snow’s “Nuclear Strategy in a Dynamic World,” “the strategic school of thought that advocates nuclear war- fighting planning in addition to deter rent roles for nuclear weapons.” Flexible Response — a policy First devised by the Kennedy administration that involves building up both conven tional and nuclear warfighting capabili ties. Flexible response is the backbone of Deterrence Plus. Proponents of Deter rence Plus claim that flexible response allows the United States to act in a situa tion without being limited to a nuclear response. Controlled Response — that aspect of Flexible Response which specifically concerns nuclear response. The goal of Controlled Response is to reduce the likelihood of an all-out nuclear war. According to former Secretary of De fense James A. Schlesinger, an all-out nuclear war is the least likely to occur because of the high stakes involved. Instead, according to the Schlesinger Doctrine, the United States should be more concerned with contingency plan ning for small scale use of nuclear weap ons. In addition, such planning is con cerned with avoiding nuclear escalation. Escalatory Process — is, according Snow, the “ hypothesized sequence by which the initial use of nuclear weapons could eventuate in general homelands exchange between superpowers.” The Escalatory Process also is refered to as the Escalation Ladder. Many propo nents of Deterrence strategy believe the Escalatory Process is inevitable and that nuclear war can not be contained. thermonuclear arsenals of the other with no ability to protect against any at tack.” ABM Treaty — considered the “linchpin” of the MAD doctrine, the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty limits the testing and deployment of ABM sys tems. One goal of the Treaty is to elimi nate the possibility of one superpower gaining a Ballistic Missile Defense sys tem that would alter the status quo, and thus guarantee the Mutual Hostage Relationship. This Treaty is still in ef fect. MAD — what opponents of the cur rent U.S. defense buildup call President Reagan. Seriously, MAD stands for Mu tual Assured Destruction. The goal of MAD is to obtain a situation in which each superpower is deterred from launching a nuclear attack because the other side possesses an arsenal capable of inflicting unacceptable losses in repri sal. MAD is the primary doctrine fol lowed by Deterrence strategists in the United States. SDI — Strategic Defense Initiative or “Star Wars". First publicly proposed by Reagan on March 23, 1983, SDI is the president’s effort to further Ballistic Missile Defense tech nology in hopes of rendering nuclear weapons “impotent and obsolete.” Proponents of MAD be lieve SDI will alter the Mutual Hostage Relationship that presently exists. ICBM — Intercontinental Ballistic Missile. Mutual Hostage Relationship — is, according Snow, “the situation in which the populations of the United States and the U.S.S.R can be destroyed by the SLBM — Submarine Launched Bal listic Missile. Launch On Warning (LOW) — a.k.a. Launch Under Certain Warning or Launch Under Attack. Launch On Warning advocates an automatic a dear response upon identificationofi actual Soviet attack before enemy mi ons reach their targets. Megaton (MT) — equal to one mill tons of TNT. Presently, technolo makes nuclear warheads up to 85 mtj tons possible. “Fat Man,” the first! dear device dropped in anger, had equivalent explosive force of 20, - tons of TNT. Strategic Weapons — any wq designed to strike an enemy’s hoi land. First Strike Capability — the abil to mount a pre-emptive nuclear vd against an enemy, thereby eliminatii ment bond the enemy’s ability to retaliate. | Th e add 7 1 will be de< Second Strike Capability the abi; ir mg yy, to absorb an enemy strike and still retwth $190 a nuclear arsenal capable of inflicff ceeds to b unacceptable damage to the enemy. MIRV — Multiple Independeni feeds to be Targetable Re-entry Vehicle. Current! Ion in the some U.S. and Soviet ballistic missi|^ ent of . are capable of carrying up to 16 warheads. |)f the ren $190 millit PRO 0 Sections Resolution amendn the Texs card to illion of John Hallett is a senior ence major, a columnist and a AM projects political st| j and a Aeifi Editor for The Battalion. Soviets take tough stance despite soft talk A diplomat or so here, a few trade representatives there, sometimes a journalist or two — in recent years that Roxinne Eivasti Guest Columnist has been the record on expulsions be tween the Soviet Union and Western countries. Expulsions of Soviet citizens from Western countries are usually fewer than a half dozen at a time. The Soviets typically retaliate, frequently in fewer numbers. Sometimes they take no ac tion. was ordered out of Moscow, go for an eye-for-an-eye and order out 18 em bassy diplomats and staff members, five journalists and two businessmen? Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the Soviet party leader who came to power in March, is taking a tough stand despite his soft talk toward the West in areas such as improved relations and disarma ment. So why did the Soviet Union, despite the reported British warning of further expulsions if even one British citizen The last biggest single expulsion of Soviets abroad, before last week’s action by Britain against 25 Soviets which the Soviets matched number for number, was in April 1983. France expelled 47 Soviets, saying it would not be a soft “underbelly” for es pionage, especially in military matters and technology. Moscow called the or der “arbitrary” but took no action. The Soviet order Saturday for 25 Bri tons to leave came two days after Lon don announced it was expelling 25 Sovi ets on spy charges. Britain’s Foreign Office said the Sovi ets it ordered out were tabbed as spies by Oleg A. Gordievski, whom it identi fied as the KGB’s chief agent in Britain. It said Gordievski, a Soviet Embassy counselor, defected and was granted asylum in Britain. In retaliation, Moscow expelled'the Britons, accusing all 25 of “activities in compatible with their official status,” a diplomatic phrase for spying. In December 1984, four months be fore Gorbachev came to power, British Prime Min ister Margaret Thatcher hosted him in London and heralded him as a “man I can do business with.” no direct reference to the allegation. Observers in Moscow say that while Thatcher has pursued a “peace offen sive” with the Soviets, she has remained steadfastly aligned with U.S. policies and may have aroused Soviet ire by sometimes taking an even more hard line stand. Britain and the Soviet Union have a long-standing espionage enmity. And Gorbachev appar ently means business. Through the Soviet press and the Western news media, including a recent interview with Time magazine, the 54- year-old Soviet leader has proclaimed a desire to im prove ties with the West. However, when the United States announced it would test an anti-satellite weapon, the Soviet news agency Tass reported that Moscow no longer felt bound not to de ploy anti-satellite weapons in space. When the United States ac cused Moscow of using a chemical “spy dust” to track Americans, Gorbachev made In 1971, Britain kicked out 105 Soviet diplomats, trade people and journalists whom it accused of being spies in dis guise. The Soviet Union barely retal iated, expelling five Britons and not al lowing 13 others who were on vacation to return to the Soviet Union. Relations were strained for years. At the time, observers noted that London did not have more than 100 embassy employees — including diplo mats and support personnel — and a Soviet retaliation would have amounted to a virtual severance of diplomatic ties with London. Britain has since imposed limits on the number of Soviet envoys in London, and the unofficial lineup after last week’s expulsions was 32 full diplomats in Moscow for Britain and 33 Soviet dip lomats in London. Although journalists have always been considered a low-level way for countries to get at one another, Britain expelled five journalists among the 25 Soviets ordered out and the Soviets re taliated by expelling five journalists. By unofficial records, it appears to be the largest single group of Western cor respondents ordered out at once and leaves Britain with nine permanently ac credited correspondents in Moscow. Roxinne Ervasti is Moscow bureau chief for The Associated Press. The Battalion USPS 045 360 Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Rhonda Snider, Editor Michelle Powe, Managing Editor Loren Steffy, Opinion Page Editor Karen Bloch, City Editor John Hallett, Kay Mallett, News Editors Travis Tingle, Sports Editor The Battalion Staff Assistant City Editors Kirsten Dietz, Jerry Oslin Assistant News Editors Cathie Anderson, Jan Perry Assistant Sports Editor Charean Williams Entertainment Editors Cathy Riely, Walter Smilli Art Director. Wayne Grabein Copy Editors Reoecca Adair, M i ke Da vis, Sarah Oates Make-up Editor Ed Cassavov Staff Writers.. Tamara Belt Meg Cadigan, Ed Cassavov, Cindy Gay, Doug Hall, Paul Herndon, Wendy Johnson Tammy Kirk, Jens Koepke, Trent Leopold, Mary McWhorter, June Pang, Tricia Parker, Brian Pearson, Lynn RaePovec, Marybeth Rohsner, Gigi Shams)', Kenneth Sury Cartoonists Mike Lane, Scott McCullar, Kevin Thomas Columnists Camille Brown, John Hallett, Karl Pallmeyer Photographers Greg Bailey, Anthony Casper, Frank Hada, Jaime Lopez, Michael Sanchez Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaptt operated as a community service to Texas AltM and Bryan-College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of tit Editorial Board or the author, and do not necessarily rep resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, laculy or the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Department of Communications. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during Texas A&M regular semesters, except tor holidaf and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are (16.15 per semester, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843. Editorial staff phone number: (409)845-3316. Ad vertising: (409) 845-2611. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battal ion, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843 dedicated t trol project The ante the legisla creation, ai mentation gram to wl to $250 mil to insure f of and int obligations iivisions of servation, v quality enh drainage, r or desalinis to continue the membe legislature gram will < ersary of ition beet itution. B fore expira not be affe The ame the legislat' priate mom Btate treasu and other f able to go certain enu ; purposes. A be permitte of constitul projects to lorporations The prop* pear on the “The cons authorize tional $9£ ter Deveh special y conservati water qu; control, d trol, reel agricultui servation, authorize gram, anc for which went Bom PROP ON Section 3 ■ion 6 pro amendment Texas Wate i and i *ater cons*