Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 4, 1990)
A The Battalion OPINION Wednesday, October 3,1990 Welcome new Aggies from Japan campus T he opening of Texas A&M’s branch campus in Koriyama, Ja pan, was an important milestone for the University. As markets and communications become increasingly international, recogni tion of our role in a global economy and culture is vital. This week’s arrival of 50 students from the A&M Koriyama branch brings the message close to home. Though they live across the world, these visitors are our fellow students. The students from Koriyama are making history for A&M. We should be happy and proud to welcome them to Aggieland. The Battalion Editorial Board Souter’s nomination starts age of un-Bork on court Soon-to-be Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter has been called many things in the last few weeks. He has often been called the Stealth judge, flying past inquisitors relatively unnoticed and unscathed. A more appropriate title might be the un-Bork, a title which must surely make George Bush smile with glee. Judge Bork was an oft-published, garrulous, outspoken jurist who had been responsible for a number of legal precedents. His public views and numerous published works were ultimately his downbringing. Souter, on the other hand, is reserved, stoic and monastic — an unknown commodity. His friends call him a ty pical stubborn Yankee, and his speech shows the typical New England attitude that all significant work is done by people who shovel snow nine months out of the year. This unknown commodity’s nomination was approved last week on a 13-1 vote by the Senate J udiciary Committee, with only (suprise!) Sen. Ted Kennedy in opposition. Surprisingly smooth sailing for a man with so many question marks. It seems that question marks would give our chief executive an irritating rash after some of his predecessor’s picks are examined. President Eisenhower was proud of his Supreme Court nominee, Warren Burger. Eisenhower later called this century’s most notable liberal “a big mistake.” Byron White was also a surprise to President Kennedy. Justice Blackmun made an inexcusably unethical mistake when he went on camera f ollowing Judge Souter’s nomination to blast him and suggest his chances of confirmation were negligible. This proclamation by one of the Court’s doddering old fossils only serves to reiterate the need to inf use new blood into the Court in order to replace several walking cadavers. Souter’s blood was targeted by Senate leftists and militant women’s groups due to his suspected anti-abortion, anti affirmative action stance. Many of the questions served only to show the ignorance of the questioners, namely Howard Metzenbaum and Ted Kennedy, while shedding little light on the nominee’s views. Soon after Souter’s nomination, Sen. Metzenbaum attempted to alienate conservatives from him by saying that important information about the judge will “come out of the closet,” a blatant inference of homosexuality which was brought on by his bachelorhood. This was almost as sleazy as the investigation into Judge Bork’s VCR Larry Cox M Columnist \ 1 k usage, which was investigated in the hope of uncovering X-rated rentals. Both attempts were unsuccessful. Later in the hearings, Metzenbaum suggested that Souter was unfit to sit on the Court because he came from an area with few minorities and thus could not be sensitive to their interests. Must all f uture justices be from the Bronx or Washington D.C.? I hope not. It was also suggested that Souter’s single lif estyle and lack of a family prevented him from being in touch with values which must be considered in many cases. ' If this were the case, Justice Scalia, with his many children, would be chief justice. Besides, the mere thought of Ted Kennedy questioning someone on family values should be enough to have the entire country rolling in the aisles. The un-Bork nominee had abortion rights activists and the NOW gang squealing in outrage about his supposed intent to overturn the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion. If Roe vs. Wade is unfortunately overturned, it won’t be because David Souter was confirmed. The right to privacy, which Sarah Weddington so eloquently used to uphold, has suf f ered a number of legal setbacks, most notably the Court’s 1986 decision to uphold Georgia’s sodomy law. Souter’s opposition to abortion is far from clear anyway. Souter’s lack of a paper trail — pertinent publications and precedents — make any concerted opposition to his nomination in the name of abortion rights akin to playing with a Ouija board. He is being opposed strictly because he appears to be conservative. Appearances, however, can be deceptive. With Souter’s confirmation by the full Senate this week, President Bush can find comfort (for now) that the un-Bork strategy worked. Liberals will do well to realize that the sacrificial slaughter of Judge Bork means we’ll never again have an open book Supreme Court nominee. Relative anonymity and a hundred question marks will surround Justice Souter and any future justice picks until they make their indelible stamp on America. The Age of the un-Bork is here to stay. Don’t be surprised if a few politicos get burned in the process — even as they try to keep up the heat. Larry Cox is a graduate student in range science. The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Cindy McMillian, Editor Timm Doolen, Managing Editor Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor Holly Becka, City Editor Kathy Cox, Kristin North, News Editors Nadja Sabawala, Sports Editor Eric Roalson, Art Director Lisa Ann Robertson, Lifestyles Editor Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup porting newspaper operated as a commu nity service to Texas A&M and Bryan- College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial board or the au thor, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during Texas A&M regu lar semesters, except for holiday and ex amination periods. Newsroom: 845-3313. Mail subscriptions are $20 per semes ter, $40 per school year and $50 per full year: 845-2611. Advertising rates fur nished on request: 845-2696. Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col lege Station, TX 77843-1111. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843-4111. Opinion Page Editor Ellen Hobbs 8452 U.S., stop fueling insurgencie President George Bush seems to have an overabundance of spare time — he even finds time to play golf as the country creeps toward war. But between holes, Mr. Bush can’t seem to find enough time to end a few wars that the United States is currently fighting, specifically three insurgencies that we’re fueling in foreign countries. I speak of the insurgencies in Cambodia, Angola and Afghanistan. In these insurgencies, U.S. military aid is given to rebel groups fighting to overthrow their country’s governments, which are supported directly or indirectly by the Soviet Union. In each of these insurgencies, the rebel groups are violent-minded organizations that would not promote democracy if they were to win militarily. In addition, since the Cold War has thawed, peace and free and fair elections are within reach in each country. The Soviets have made moves in each of the wars to pressure the government to work for a peaceful, negotiated solution. On the other hand, the U.S. has barely acknowledged that the wars continue and that civilians continue to suffer and die. Although the United States has participated in the peace talks of each country, it has not made any serious moves to pressure the rebel groups that it supports to use the negotiating table and the economic leverage that the U.S. can offer as their tools, rather than guns and missiles. In Cambodia, where 64,000 have been killed since 1978, the United States continues to support the rebel coalition that is led by the Khmer Rouge. The Khmer Rouge, led by the murderous Pol Pot, killed over one million people when it ruled Cambodia from 1975- 1978. The United States has been working in tandem with the Chinese government in supplying the rebel coalition, and because of the support of two superpowers, the Khmer Rouge has made great military and political advances recently. If the Khmer Rouge were to regain power in Cambodia; the country may experience the killing fields once again. Nevertheless, the United States has not pressured the rebel coalition to fight its battles at the negotiating table rather than in thejungles and villages. And the negotiating table has proven to be a potent form of conflict resolution in Cambodia. Both the Vietnam-supported government and the rebel coalition have agreed to a basic peace plan that would lead up to free and fair elections. Only the details remain to be hammered out. The largest detail — deciding who would chair the Supreme National Council (the somewhat impotent organization that would represent Cambodia during an interim government) — is not worth shooting bullets over. But, unsurprisingly, the Khmer Rouge continues to fight; and, unsurprisingly, the United States continues to send the rebel coalition arms. America’s first priority in Cambodia should be to stop the fighting. America should pressure the rebels to stop their attacks on the government and the people. Then, with a little communication with the Soviets (who support the Cambodian government via Vietnam), a cease-fire can be quickly negotiated. Above all, the United States should cease its arms shipments to the rebel coalition. According to some experts, the Khmer Rouge has accumulated enough arms from the United States and China to keep fighting for months, maybe years, even if the shipments were to stop today. This means that if the Khmer Rouge were to disagree with the results of a Irwin Tang Columnist i 1 k Cambodian election, they could dig into possible hidden arms caches in the jungle and continue their fight even without superpower support. In Angola, 341,000 people have been killed since the insurgency began in 1975. Of these victims of war, 320,000 were civilians. The U.S. supplies the National Union for the Total Independence of Angola (UNITA), the anti-government group led by Jonas Savimbi. Savimbi has been notorious for his human rights abuses. Because of his brutal style, Congress is considering reducing his funding. But simply giving UNITA a few million dollars less is not enough. The U.S. must work quickly with the Soviet Union (who supports the Angolan government) to work out a cease-fire. The Soviets have shown that they art- eager to negotiate rather than fight; they helped to pressure Cuba to begin withdrawing its troops from Angola in 1988. The table has been set for negotiating. And the time is crucial; if a cease-fire cannot be achieved soon, Angola could suffer from intense famine. The United States has already allowed one cease-fire to slip through its fingers. In 1988, Bush withdrew U.S. diplomats from the mediating process at a crucial moment. Some say Bush has not put peace talks in Angola near the top of his agenda to keep the support of conservative hawks (Curran History, May, 1990). Whatever the reason, Angolan peace should be a high presidential priority. Peace is ripe for the picking. Finally, Afghanistan is still being torn apart by war. Almost two years since the Soviet Union withdrew its forces, the American-backed “mujahideen” and the Soviet-supported Afghan government at e still fighting. , Mail Gorbachev has proposed a ceasei; and free and fair elections as momtc by the two superpowers. But, once again, the United States refused to accept victory. The United States ref usal shows that it is more concern: wit It military victory than-with democratic goals. In fact, the Bush Administration demonstrated its extreme desire for military bravado! breaking the t ules of the Geneva Accord of April 1988. The accord stipulated that the Uij States cease its military supportoftk mujahideen after the Soviet forcesIj withdrawn. The mujahideen are not thekindt rebels that should be supportedintlf first place. Drug dealers and religion fanatics dominate the various faction the mujahideen. Last year, rebel-controlled areas exported 700 tons of opium. Theopi exports translate into one thirdoftin heroin sold in America (NT. Times Mag., Feb. 4, 1990.). In addition, the rebels continueto fight among each other and bombciit killing civilians. Their continued bombing has shifted supporttowardi present Afghan government. To be sure, the governments that! Soviet Union supports in eachofthes conflicts do not have good humanitarian records, either. I he point is, democracy and hums rights can arise from each of these hideous wars. The Soviet Unionisra to work for it. They have pressuredii Vietnamese to withdraw from Cambodia. They have pressuredthe Cubans to withdraw their forcesfroii Angola. And they have withdrawn tin own forces in Afghanistan. Theyhan pressured their proxy governments!) give up crucial concessions, such as allowing the Khmer Rouge to participate in an interim government 1 he United States must match the Sov iet Union’s efforts in serious talk for peace. The President should ti directly to Gorbachev about ending wars that serve no purpose assoonas possible. 1 he wars may beproxywi) hut the people are real. Irwin Tang is a junior politicalm major. Call Grad school tuition hike ludicrous EDITOR: In reference to the article on the front page of the October 1, 1990 Battal ion: Does the business school only think in terms of money? I heir suggestion that raising tuition — doubling it — for graduate students in order to drop their enrollment is ludicrous! If the business school has too many qualifiedap plicants then raise the standards for qualification, don’t penalize the students who are qualified by raising tuition. Why don’t they try raising the average CRE entrance score criterion? A tennent of the 1 exas A&M University system and every educational in- stitution in Texas is to offer a quality education to the public regardless of li nancial status. This is discrimination against the poor! Graduate students are the workhorses or slaves of this research institution already. If Texas A&M University wants to be a front-line research institution it should remember that most of that research is being done by graduate stu dents. We teach your laboratories, we grade your papers and we do there search which has published the papers on which this university prides itself. Our tuition is being compared to the University of Texas systems grad uate tuition — well lets look at what U I graduate students get for that higher tuition: FREE medical insurance, FREE campus parking, and FREEcitybus passes. All of these expensive items graduate students at A&M have to pay out of their own pockets. Most of the UT graduate students also are on a fellowship or other waiver system such that they don’t pay tuition anyway Their departments waive it. A&M departments do not. A&M graduate stu dents are a lot less well off than the students at UT and now you wantusto pay even more to go to school. This in a year when inflation is increasingbui our stipends haven’t been raised to even accommodate the cost of living in creases. In the vernacular of Aggies: This is very BAD BULL! Marsha Lambregts,graduate student accompanied by 11 signatures Adventures In Cartooning by Don Atkinsoni f H£Y! 66T OV£& (TeR£ f ( rWR omeR'b OK TH€ , Vtiotief t —^ ^ 'Don ? m hawt FROtA VQU (H r Few weeKs. hows uf£ M rue com of ^cavers? j Ok, Mor bfiD. Tne FOOD'S PRcnV 600P RKP X mve SOME FZJ6MDS. LOOK, THE PE/TSOU XM CKLLIM0... WOOED YOU MIND A- DOING ME 0 . SMALL FAVOR? s ByS OfTI Gi voict the : body M link dent stud< Rt ently mod H' creat A&N Grae Dun dent with cern: So facet and i seart Pr wage taxes Dun Grat sue < tage “T with stuck parti for si Al cone’ want invol M; grad the ! dent sityc II grad knov exan Sena