natk
rHE BATTAL1
ek
tings
>cused on the]
' edged into the
st year, when in
ite in the Cincii
as matched by
Enquirer newsp;
Gannett Co.,»
own online he
t board. That
pe the expansia
der. owned j
mett, Knight-Rii
ne Co. newspi
Understanding the conflict
U.S. should do more to address roots of terrorism
T-^.i
H \i
1. st(
and CareerBui
ire imponant
een the way
d workers li
!:::
urly workers
ing out a
creating and
umes. So
■eekers to file
that can be viev
P®
pphu:
both
> boards ackne.
some hourly»
have comp;
they have set
ed services
ications.
STUDENT
iOVERNMENT
Id us 127.
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 1 1 • Friday, January 24, 2003
ized i
Mowing Sept. 11,
America has focused on
stopping terrorism. Many
steps have been taken to pre-
ent terrorism, including the
overthrow of the Taliban and
ic formation of the
Department of Homeland
Security. Much of the efforts, sc
arhave aimed at stopping
ose who have already decid-
d to commit terrorist acts as opposed
addressing issues that leave pieople
feeling terrorism is their only option.
In the Islamic world, much of the
lustration that leads to terrorism comes
rom the situation involving the conflict
between the Palestinians and Israelis.
In the middle of a modem, western-
country in the world's spotlight,
war has simmered for more than 35
years. Since 1967, when Israel defeated
coalition of Arab states, the fate of ter
ritory occupied during the war has been
jpin the air. It is mostly inhabited by
'alestinians, but Israeli settlements
brmed in the past 35 years also exist.
\s long as the fate of the occupied land
sin question, there will be war for it.
According to the BBC, in the two
years since Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon touched off the latest series of
jack-and-forth retaliations, there have
ieen 600 Israeli and 1,5CX) Palestinian
deaths. Most of those killed were civil-
ans. This can only be described as an
incredible tragedy played out on the
world stage. Horror stories from this
area of the world almost seem ordinary
now, as they are in the newspaper every
day.
The United States must push harder
for a final world consensus on a settle
ment, not only because it is the humani
tarian thing to do, but because it is in
our own self interest. Peace is a realistic
ibility.
The Pew Research Center, a non-
trofit agency, recently conducted a sur
vey on international opinions. More
ban 38,000 people in 44 countries were
urveyed, and the survey showed that
America was viewed much more nega-
ively in Arab and Muslim countries
in other countries at similar eco-
TIM
SCHNIEDWIND
nomic levels. The broad-based
but relatively mild dislike of the
United States in these countries
is the foundation for the
extreme dislike of the radical
few that make up terrorist
organizations.
What is the root cause of
this dislike for America? One
might speculate that it is based
primarily on perceived U.S.
involvement in the Palestinian/Israeli
conflict and misinformation in the rela
tion of world events that the people of
the Middle East get from their news
sources. Others might speculate that our
culture is fundamentally at odds with
Islam itself.
If all three of the above reasons are
true to some degree, then the perception
that the United States unfairly supports
Israel is perhaps the most damaging,
because rumors and false information
are easier to spread when washed down
with snippets of news. In the book
“What Arabs Think,” a survey provides
evidence that the Palestinian/Israeli con
flict is the root of our image problems.
A group of people from eight Arab
countries were asked what the United
States can do to improve its image. In
every country, at least a third of those
who responded mentioned some change
in the United States’ policy towards
Israel. This was the most frequently-
mentioned topic.
Assuming that the United States was
viewed as taking a more even handed
approach to the peace process, our
image problem in the Arab world would
decrease, along with the terrorist threat
to our nation. The diffusing of a tragic
conflict, while at the same time better
ing our world image, seems a much
more attractive solution than more secu
rity in the form of a larger military and
further restriction on immigrants.
There is no guarantee that peace will
work in Israel and Palestine now when
it has failed in the past. With each pass
ing year more people are realizing that
this conflict is not just a tragedy, but a
threat to stability in the Middle East and
the world. The major world powers are
currently trying to work out a peace
plan for the United States, the European
Union, the United Nations and Russia.
Known as the “quartet,” they are less
polarized on the issue than ever before.
The possibility of these countries work
ing out a fair diplomatic solution seems
hopeful.
According to the Christian Science
Monitor, the United States gives Israel
$3 billion of direct aid each year. More
than $2 billion goes to support Israel's
military. This gives the
United States consider
able bargaining lever
age to bring the Israelis
to the negotiating table.
Recently Ariel Sharon
made comments that
the European Union was
not ready to be included in
the peace process because
it is biased. This is equiv
alent to the pot calling the kettle black,
and the United States should demand
that Israel's leadership take a different
attitude that is more peace-friendly if
they want our continued support.
While details of a possible settle
ment are beyond the scope of this col
umn, there are principles that a settle
ment should include. It must involve
more countries than just the United
States, and should include the countries
in the “quartet” and several Arab states.
Israelis and Palestinians must be well
represented. The majority of occupied
territories would have to be returned to
Palestinian rule. If territory remained
part of Israel it must have a large Israeli
population or be viewed as necessary to
ensure Israel's security, and would have
to form a contiguous and logical geo
graphic area with Israel's current bor
ders. In return, the international coali
tion would make a firm commitment to
defend Israel from any further attacks,
and make it clear that this a permanent
solution. Arab states would have to rec
ognize Israel as a state.
If a settlement is worked out,
maybe the money the United States is
currently tunneling into the area's mili
taries and governments could then be
redirected into helping the people of
the region escape the harsh economic
realities brought on by war. This would
certainly help to alleviate the despera-
HHMBM
tion that is the root of
most terrorism.
Terrorism is a selfish cry for help.
The steps the United States have taken
so far have sent the world the message
that we will not tolerate it. Now it is
time to answer the cry for help. We
should not further punish those who
are suffering by ignoring their plight
because of the selfish and des
perate acts of terrorists. To truly win
the war against terrorism, the United
States must end the war for the occu
pied territories.
Tim Schniedwind is a gradtuite student
environmental engineering major.
MAIL CALL
)iversity and political
:orrectness reexamined
What right do A&M officials have to
>ass judgment on a party that does
lot even occur on campus? The
idministration is exacerbating the
ension caused by their own hyper-
ensitivity to race. It doesn't help that
)ur officials seem willing to sacrifice
radition and the things we love
ibout A&M for vague buzzword goals
ike "diversity" and a top-20 ranking.
The administration seems to have
orgotten that this university is a
business. We, the students, pay for a
service to be provided. We are the
:ustomers. And the First Rule of
business is that the customer is
ilways right. So whether we want
he Bonfire back on campus or a
simple theme party, aren't our offi-
:ials obligated to facilitate that — or
at least not actively hinder it? After
ill, businesses that don't follow the
Me fall by the wayside.
Money from our pockets allows
hese people to live and buy food;
with all due respect, they should
start acting like it.
It has been my experience that
many issues of so-called racism have
been blown out of proportion in the
past and probably will continue to be
in the future. Society has taught us to
be sensitive to the feelings of others
based on the color of their skin. "Don't
say this you might offend someone."
"Don't do that you might hurt some
one's feelings." In my opinion, in our
effort to be "politically correct" we
have actually encouraged racism.
Have we not alienated the races from
each other in doing this? Can a person
not make a comment any more with
out it being considered offensive?
In a failing attempt to bring unity to
Americans, society has made us afraid
to branch out and meet people of a
different nationality because this per
son might be "offended" by what we
do or say. When students decide to
throw a party on Martin Luther King
day and want to call it a ghetto party,
who's right is it to say that they can't?
Is this not an infringement on those
students free speech rights? Whether
or not it was racist is not the issue.
Obviously these students did not
intend for the theme to be racist. It
was simply a themed party thrown on
a national holiday.
Jamie Scott
Class of 2005
TtrrRTjCW
New name, new identity?
More than name change needed to improve Tt
P TTS is no more. The
organization that is
responsible for ticketing
and towing on the A&M cam
pus, among other things, is
now simply Transportation
Services (TS).
With this name change, TS
Director Rodney Weis and the NICHOLAS
rest of (PT)TS believe they NEUMANN
can convince the student body
that their organization is now different
and better. Those believing this ruse
are sorely mistaken, and only need to
look at the actions of TS involved with
its name change to see why.
To inform students of the name
change, the former PTTS launched a
public relations blitz, which, fortu
nately, is now over. The organization
placed ads in The Battalion and on
radio stations, among other things. As
such, the money generated from TS
giving out several parking tickets was
enough to pay for one of these ads,
whether or not ticket money funded
the media blitz. TS said the advertise
ments were designed primarily to
improve its public image and publicize
its name change.
When one looks at the public rela
tions campaign, the events scheduled
were even more appalling — radio
spots, several ads in The Battalion,
and little festivities at which food and
products were given away to entice
students into liking TS. Interestingly,
the need to change TS stationary,
logos, etc. all over campus adds up to
$14,000, according to TS Assistant
Director Debbie Hoffman. Associate
Director Kenneth Kimball said the
funds for the name change came from
the same account into which ticket
revenues go. Thus, the students, facul
ty and staff of Texas A&M, directly or
indirectly, helped to finance the TS
name change with a couple hundred
parking tickets.
TS claims, in its Battalion
ad, that, “We’ve changed our
name. But we’re not stopping
there,” It promises a new and
improved organization. The
question remaining to be
answered is: why did TS need
a new name to become a better
organization and serve the
A&M community in a more
beneficial manner? The simple
answer: it doesn't.
The only thing the TS name change
really attempts to accomplish is to
improve the public image of the
organization. The last thing a ticketed
driver wants his ticket money going to
is the improvement of the public
image of the very organization that
gave him his ticket, yet this is exactly
what is happening.
u
With this name change,
TS Director Rodney Weis
and the rest of (PT)TS
believe they can convince
the student body that their
organization is now
different and better. Those
believing this ruse are
sorely mistaken...
Rather than using money from tick
ets and other sources to actually
improve the services of the organiza
tion, TS is wasting it on making itself
look better. If TS can think of no bet
ter way to use its money than on pub
lic relations, it should give its excess
cash to a department or organization at
A&M that could actually use it in a
positive manner. The last thing TS
should be concerned about is its pub
lic image, while its primary concern
should be serving its customers. Sadly,
its priorities are exactly reversed.
Student stories of horrendous expe
riences with the former PTTS abound,
and now traumatic experiences with
Transportation Services are being cre
ated every day. Yet TS is doing every
thing it can to make certain people
like the employees of the department.
The aforementioned ads in The
Battalion show 14 TS employees smil
ing. Until the ads ran, most could
count on their own fingers the number
of times they had seen a TS employee
with a smile on his face or a friendly,
caring attitude. The media blitz of TS
is really nothing more than a cam
paign of propaganda that attempts to
mask the deviousness and discourte
ousness of the organization behind a
wall of artificial smiles.
The TS ad promises the organiza
tion is “moving in a whole new direc
tion,” or “forward.” Its new Web site
claims that TS’s “focus will remain
customer driven.” While TS is correct
in implying that up to this point it has
not been moving “forward,” its ability
to focus on customers is laughable.
The people TS tickets can hardly be
called “customers.”
TS needs to realize that the manner
in which it does its job, not a bunch of
glitzy advertisements, freebies, and a
new name, is the only way it can
improve its image with the student
body. Weis became the new director of
PTTS this past year and was supposed
to usher in a new and better PTTS, but
his first major step is disappointingly
one in the wrong direction. A rose by
any other name is still a rose; like
wise, PTTS by the name of
Transportation Services is still PTTS.
Nicholas Neumann is a graduate student
computer science major.