Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 14, 1993)
■■ ■ ,1993 ke on game game 1 final ie sea ring In- ohn ent- field 989. d, it : '93 nost tion, r for mon i see onal ime, i an- ut a gies' Texas- ;inall)i at Bee :poned (. After =e this will re gains! Action reek. s, ✓ I j. e e s. Opinion Wednesday, April 14,1993 The Battalion Page 9 The Battalion Editorial Board Steve O'Brien, editor in chief Jason Loughman, managing editor Kyle Burnett, news editor Todd Stone, city editor Dave Thomas, news editor Stacy Feduda, opinion page editor Don Norwood, sports editor Susan Owen, lifestyles editor Darrin Hill, photo editor The Battalion 100 years at Texas A&M Editorial Step in right direction Enforcing Bosnian no-fly zone NATO aircraft took to the skies above the tortured nation of Bosnia on Monday to enforce the United Nations-imposed no-fly zone and emphasize the U.N. desire to stop the Bosnian civil war. Serbian military aircraft have re portedly violated the zone about 500 times since its cre ation in October. The flights marked the first time the alliance has either deployed forces to a combat area or deployed forces outside NATO territory since its inception in 1949. This cooperation between NATO and the United Nations serves as a sign that the world grows less tolerant of the car nage in Bosnia. Daily reports of atrocities such as mass executions, gang rapes and concentration camps have been a stark reminder that old realities persist in the new world order. Such reports fueled some debate among Americans as to just what role the United States, as the world's only remaining superpow er, should have in policing such brutality The only conclusion America seems to have come to is that our role lies somewhere between that of isolationist and global policeman. Operation Deny Flight seems to strike a good balance between these views. We need nei ther sit passively by, nor send young Americans to die in the streets of Saraje vo. Additionally, it is good to see other na tions shouldering their fair share of the military burden; French and Dutch warplanes patrolled Bosnian skies along with U.S. aircraft. However, we must ensure that we have not set ourselves up to be dragged into the war itself — a war in which the lines of battle, like the array of ethnic boundaries, are most confusing. Public support for such an in volvement would be questionable at best. President Clinton would do well to remember what happens when American soldiers go to war with out the wholehearted support of their nation. Kudos to Koldus, a great 'Aggie' Leader leaves mark on school he served for 20 years DAVID BROOKS Columnist I f you ever take the elevator to the 10th floor of Rudder Tower, you will immediately begin to understand how the Department of Student Services feels about every student, from the student body president to the most inse cure fish. As you step off the elevator on the 10th floor, the room opens up into a wide foyer that features a comfortable couch, friendly fur nishings and a beautiful Aggie tra ditions blanket embroidered by a Texas A&M Mother's Club. If you visit other administrative offices in the building, the differ ence is striking. When you step off the elevator, you are immediately confronted with a vast expanse of blank wall, three feet from your nose. The message is clear: "Important business is being conducted here, but you don't need to know about it." Not so on the 10th floor. This August, an era will end at Texas A&M. Dr. John Koldus, who has been the Vice President for Student Services since 1973, is retiring. It is through Dr. Koldus' leadership that Student Services has become the heart of the student experience at Texas A&M. The stories about Dr. Koldus and his rapport with students are legion. Almost everyone on campus has heard about his legendary card file that holds the names of every student he meets. Everyone who goes to Fish Camp hears about the famous Koldus luncheons — freshmen one week, upperclassmen the next. Freshmen get invited just by walking up to Dr. Koldus and intro ducing themselves. Some of the stories about Dr. Koldus aren't quite as well known. One can begin to understand how much this man cares about students upon hearing that one student asked Dr. Koldus to give her away at her wed ding. Another story involves a time when there was a terri ble car accident at a railroad crossing near campus. Dr. Koldus and his wife, Mary Dell, took one of the students injured in the wreck into their home to live with them for a semester. This girl was able to finish her degree at A&M, undoubtedly because of the caring shown by Dr. Koldus and his family. In his time at Texas A&M, Dr. Koldus has often had to walk a tightrope. His tenure has seen the creation of the department of Multicultural Services, the explosive growth of the Greek system, the rise of racial tensions and hundreds of other controversial events. Through it all. Dr. Koldus has been responsible for seeing that the University treated everyone fairly. As might be expected, someone always has some sort of gripe about the way these situations have been re solved. However, it seems that through the years Dr. K has done his best to let the groups involved do as much as they can toward solving their own problems. Maybe that approach is just one more facet of his philosophy that college is a place to learn from more than just books. As the story goes, none of Dr. Koldus' children were happy back in 1973 when he announced that he was tak ing a position at Texas A&M. All Dr. Koldus' degrees were from Arkansas, and the kids had grown up died- in-the-wool Razorback fans. However, within a year of the move they had all started to bleed maroon, and I've heard that now they don't even like to be reminded about that Razorback connection. In my four years at A&M, I've heard various groups label themselves the "heart of Aggieland," the "pulse of Aggieland," the "voice of Aggieland" and other self-ag grandizing titles, but I'm not sure any of them were ac curate. Everyday people embody the real pulse of Ag gieland, and Dr. John Koldus represents the epitome of what it really means to be an Aggie. Brooks is a senior economics major. >n ■4 Dispelling myths of NAFTA: Beneficial to U.S. economy JOE CANTERBURY Guest Columnist It is quite diffi cult to pick up a newspaper these days without see ing the acronym "NAFTA." The North American Free Trade Agree ment, up for ratifi cation this sum mer, has become a very hot issue in business, political, and cocktail-party discussions. NAFTA is viewed by some as a rebuttal to the European Economic Community and as a natural development in an emerging global economy that will open new markets for American businesses and entrepreneurs. Others view NAFTA as a parasitic disease, capable of sucking the jobs and life out of our state and na tional economies. Many people are quick to agree with Ross Perot's interpretation of NAFTA as a threat that will send jobs south. However, many people do not know the facts about the NAFTA document and do not understand all the possible implications. The truth is most people 1 could use a little education about NAF TA, especially since very few people, if any, will miss the effects of NAFTA. NAFTA, the trade agreement negoti ated between Canada, Mexico, and the United States on December 17,1992, will go into effect on January 1,1994, if it is ratified by all three countries' legis latures. NAFTA will provide for phased elimination of tariff and most non-tariff barriers on regional trade within 10 years for most products. It will create the largest and richest market in the world, with 360 million consumers and $6 trillion in annual output. NAFTA will provide access to Mexi co for U.S. agricultural exports, provide increased access for U.S. firms to Mexi co's state-owned energy companies and phase out restrictions in the North American auto market. Texas has a lot at stake in NAFTA, because 30 percent of its current annual exports are sent to Mexico, and these figures are estimated to double by the turn of the century if NAFTA goes into effect. Although Canada, the largest trad ing partner of the United States, is a very important factor in NAFTA dis cussions, we will emphasize the impli cations of free trade with Mexico be cause of its juxtaposition with Texas and the controversy surrounding open trade borders between the United States and Mexico. Trade integration with Mexico can support a more cost-competitive U.S. manufacturing sector, making U.S. ex ports more competitive in global mar kets. Many of the jobs that people wor ry about moving to Mexico are current ly heading to Asia. A shift from Asia to Mexico will help expand the Mexican industrial base, giving the United States a good chance to capture some of the second and third round benefits of higher Mexican incomes vis-a-vis Asia, where we capture next to nothing. Thus, the consumer and the export industries will benefit from trade liber alization. Currently U.S. exports to Mexico and Canada support over two million jobs. This number will drastical ly increase with the ratification of NAF TA. The Institute of International Eco nomics predicted that NAFTA would result in the creation of at least a half a million new U.S. jobs, based on exports to Mexico alone. NAFTA reinforces the extensive mar ket-oriented policies implemented in Mexico in 1985. NAFTA can ensure a continuation of rapid change in the Mexican economy by extending the re form process to key economic sectors. Improved economic conditions in Mex ico lead to higher purchasing powers for Mexicans. A substantial amount of of this income will be spent on U.S. goods and services . In 1989, 70 percent of Mexico's imports were from the United States and the average Mexican imported $380 of U.S. merchandise an nually. Jobs that are "sucked" down south will be recaptured in the form of extra export income and increased trade for the United States. Critics claim that NAFTA will result in a plethora of manufacturing opera tions moving to Mexico, where labor is cheaper, and environmental regulations are much more lax. It is certain that some jobs will go south, but this is bet ter than these jobs being transported across the globe to Asia, as they have been in the past. The environmental concerns can be allayed by applying pressure on Mexico to enact stricter environmental regula tions. Many critics argue that the immigra tion problem will worsen after NAFTA is ratified. The main reason for illegal immigration from Mexico is related to economics. However, the higher in comes and better jobs available in Mexi co resulting from NAFTA would reduce illegal immigration and not increase it. It has been estimated that for every 1 percent increase in Mexican capital stock, migration of Mexican workers to the United States falls by over 40,000 people. It is incorrect to believe that Mexico's gain is the United States' loss. It is in the greater interests of the United States to have a friendly and prosperous neighbor. Mexico, the United States and Canada can all benefit greatly from NAFTA. Thursday, April 15 in MSC room 201, the Graduate International Business So ciety is sponsoring a debate on NAFTA. Speaking for NAFTA will be Richard Fisher, a U.S. Senate candidate and Dal las financier, who has written and spo ken in favor of NAFTA on many occa sions. Speaking against NAFTA will be Jaime Martinez of the AFL-CIO. Mar tinez, who has spoken throughout the U.S. and Mexico on NAFTA, will repre sent the labor point of view. The debate is open to the public and all are encouraged to come and learn more about this important issue. Canterbury is a first-year MBA student. He is the Vice President of the Graduate In ternational Business Society. Vikram Simha Torpunuri contributed to this guest column. He is an associate at the Texas Transportation Institute.