Newspaper Page Text
.
Page 4 The Hfd and Black. Wednesday, November 2N. 1979
^Perceptions
" 1 ' n
The Security Council
V >
It was good to hear that the
Security Council of the United
Nations has decided to meet to
discuss the Iran crisis, in which
49 Americans are being held
hostage in the U S. Embassy in
Tehran.
What the meeting signals is
that the rest of the world has
realized the seriousness of the
situation and that something has
to be done about it.
The United States is in a tough
position, especially if they have
to work by themselves. If the
United States tries military
force, chances are good that the
American hostages would be
killed
President Carter has already
attempted just about every
economic and diplomatic form of
pressure possible. Yet, the
Iranian students continue to hold
the Americans hostage.
Hopefully the Security Council
will come up with some sort of
decisive action to remedy the
Iran situation. The Security
Council would be falling short of
its duties if it resorted to nothing
but rhetoric.
Definite actions to free the
American hostages need to be
taken, and soon. But the United
States cannot do it alone. They
need the support of other
countries.
The United States needs
support in the form of boycotts of
Iranian products from other
countries. Significant action such
as that could aid in getting the
hostages set free.
Most importantly, the Security
Council should realize the
significance of their task. They
have the chance to take
constructive action to set 49
people free. We hope that they
will do everything possible with
that one chance.
Definite actions to free the
American hostages need to be
taken, and soon. But the United
States cannot do it alone. It
needs the support of other
countries.
‘Bravo to outspoken patriotism’
TO THE EDITOR:
In response to letters from John R
Sakers and Carl S. Landers. I say bravo
to their outspoken patriotism I agree
that the U S is behaving like a timid
kitten while the rest of the world seems
to believe we can be ordered around like
a succumbing servant Government has
concentrated so much on being a
policeman and maternal provider for
' lesser'’ countries, it seems to have
forgotten its own country, which is
rapidly loosing world respect for not being
able to stand up and protect itself
It has been less than four years since
the Bicentennial celebrating our nation s
independence, where has all the pride,
loyalty, ‘hurrah for liberty and justice
for all” feeling gone 0 We are Americans,
united to support and defend Americans,
not Iranians, or anyone else Iranian
students are in our country openly
expressing their approval of the Tehran
situation, and we have done nothing to
suppress this
We need to let President Carter know
American citizens not only support
positive action to free the hostages in
Iran, but in fact demand it We must not
let ourselves be shot down by a small
country with a fanatic government—or
any country, for that matter
We need to show that we are still the
self-sufficient, strong powered nation we
once had the reputation of being We
need to show Iran, and we need to show
ourselves that we are. indeed, a United
States
My only argument with Mr Sakers'
and Mr Landers' letters is the suggestion
of militarv force being sent to Iran. We
must be realistic about the situation;
there is no feasible method of even
getting close to the hostages in Tehran
without Iranian retaliation—which, in all
probability, would be to harm the
hostages.
We do need to prove our pride and
strength to the world, especially to the
Iranians, and this is an opportune time to
do so. but not at the hostages' expense
Sending force into Tehran is liable to
enrage the already overemotional.
irrational people there enough to kill the
hostages immediately The big issue here
is the Iranians are running us over and
they must be stopped at all costs, but
American lives are involved, and their
safety is a primary concern.
My suggestions for a more effective
approach are to call for an immediate
halt of all U S supplies to Iran, and
confiscation of present supplies there, if
necessary. President Carter ^Jready.^
ordered the cease of all Iranian oil
imports; this is a positive measure, and
all imports from Iran aside from oil
should be boycotted, also.
1 admit that the Iranians could also kill
the hostages in response to this, but these
measures are less provocative to cause
senseless killing The American
Revolution was preambled by the Boston
Tea Party; I think we should follow the
same example and leave military force,
and even a possible declaration of war as
a last resort Let's stand up for our
country, but not cut our own throats
POLLY ANN PRETZER
‘Government
must take steps’
TO THE EDITOR:
The energy crisis is an issue all of us
are overly familiar with; however, it is
also an issue few people care to recognize
or come to grips with Regardless of the
miracles that might be performed in
extracting gasoline from coal, it is
doubtful that we will ever see sub-dollar
gasoline prices again. Instead, prices
will continue to escalate above the grasp
of lower income Americans while the
more affluent citizens continue to drive
large cars and waste gas.
While an increased sense of community
would provide the ultimate solution in
regard to decreased fuel consumption,
more realistic and immediate measures
must be taken by our government in
order to halt rising fuel demands.
Son* immediate steps which pogld be
taken by the Department of Energy
would include immediate restrictions on
car manufacturers in terms of weight
and horsepower of early 1980 models;
increased experimentation in public
gasohol use in order to stretch out our
existing resources, and revision and
reestablishment of efficient rationing
programs
Since it is evident that few Americans
are willing to pull their weight in the
midst of this “non-existent” crisis, the
government must be prepared to take the
necessary steps toward conserving our
dwindling petroleum resources
WILLIAM R. THOMPSON
Putting the symptom
before the cause
Seth Cohen
Why do people have an affinity for
putting the symptoms of a problem before
the causes of the problem? It seems we do
this all the time. Take crime for example.
Seth Cohen is a staff writer for The Red
and Black
Crime has been with us for a long time,
in fact, since the beginning of time. Yet. at
least here in the U.S.. we are always
debating about how to cure crime’s
symptoms, but we spend almost no time
trying to figure out how to cure crime
before it happens.
Admittedly there will always be those
who will commit crimes simply because
they enjoy committing crimes. But it seems
that the vast majority of crime, at least blue
collar crime, is committed by persons, who
under different circumstances, wouldn't
need or want to be a criminal.
Is it a coincidence that there is a high
crime rate in many inner cities and that
these inner cities are also very poor? Is it a
coincidence that most prisoners are from
lower socio-economic classes? It seems
obvious that poverty breeds criminal
behavior.
Yet when crime is on an upswing, as it is
now. we look solely to such methods of
control as gun control, more policemen,
and longer jail sentences. These solutions,
while perhaps necessary, will only solve
the problem temporarily. They do ab
solutely nothing to alleviate some of the
major causes of crime, such as a grossly
unfair distribution of wealth, unemploy
ment and poor education.
Another example of putting symptoms
before causes is one most of you can more
closely identify with, that is. medical
treatment. While in recent years more time
has been spent on preventive medicine, by
and large the vast majority of time and
effort is spent dealing with the symptoms,
or the illness which has already appeared.
True, many illnesses cannot be pre
vented. but there are many, many illnesses
which can be. But it doesn't seem too
profitable to the medical profession to help
prevent illness. After all. if not as many
people get sick, not as many bucks can be
made.
American foreign policy is still another
example where we react to the symptoms
but make little or no attempt to try to
understand the cause.
When a U.S. puppet, like Somoza of
Nicaragua or the Shah of Iran, is
overthrown in a revolution, we react to the
immediate situation, but don't try to
understand why entire nations acted as
they did. Because of this "pragmatic”
foreign policy we are doomed to make the
same mistakes again and again.
Why is it that we do this? Why do we
constantly treat symptoms instead of trying
Full implications of Iran
crisis have yet to be felt
Kenneth Hecht
to figure out the case of problems? The
answer seems rather obvious. It’s easier 9
It's easier to pass gun control legislation
and hire more cops than it is to eliminate
poverty, unemployment, and poor educa
tion. At least it seems easier. But this is „
only because we are brought up to deal
with present circumstances and not plan
for the future. If crime is on the upswing,
handle it for now. Don’t think about 25 or 9
50 or 100 years from now.
If backing a dictator seems advan
tageous at the time, do it. Don’t consider
the fact that one day the people will
become tired of the dictator and revolt.
This type of logic becomes painfully clear
now. at a time when students in Iran arc
holding 49 American hostages.
Our government never considered such a •
possibility when it put the Shah back in
power in 1953. After all. at the time it was
easier and more profitable to reinstate the
Shah than it would have been to deal with a a
new government.
It’s about time our leaders realized that
it might actually be more advantageous not ,
to be so “pragmatic." but a bit more
futuristic. Instead of all our actions being
geared for the here and now, why don’t we
at least consider some of the long term
consequences of our actions before they
are implemented. In the long run we may
be glad we did.
The crisis in Iran is far from over and
its full implications have yet to be felt.
The consequences of this crisis will linger
a long time after the fate of the Shah and
the 49 American hostages being held
since Nov. 4 in Tehran have been
determined. Carter has responded to the
situation in the best way possible—with
patient waiting for a diplomatic
breakthrough that until now has failed to
appear. From the beginning Carter’s
options were severely limited because of
the primary concern for the safety of the
Americans.
Kenneth Hecht is a senior in the School of
Journalism
Khomeini and his Islamic Revolution
ary Council have consistently raised the
stakes of this dangerous confrontation.
First, the Iranian students at the
American embassv demanded the return
of the Shah in exchange for the American
hostages. It was clear from the beginning
that the United States would not partake
in this ancient game of blackmail.
Instead, Carter ordered the United States
to stop importing Iranian oil (about four
percent of American consumption). This
order came only hours before Khomeini
ordered all oil exports to the U.S.
stopped.
A few days later when Iran attempted
to withdraw its SI 2 billion out of
American banks, the Carter administra
tion promptly slapped a freeze on the
withdrawal of these funds. Next, after
Khomeini threatened to try the
Americans as spies, violating funda
mental principles of international law,
Carter came out with a statement saying
in effect he has not ruled out a military
option against Iran
Now the conflict between the U.S. and
Iran will be heard before the United
Nations Security Council at the request of
Secretary-General Kurt Waldheim, who
stated that this crisis is the most serious
threat to world peace since the 1962
Cuban missile crisis. Many see the
United Nations debite as a last
diplomatic channel before the U.S.
resorts to its military option, which could
be seen as a turning point in United
States history
In the debate at the United Nations, the
U S. will focus its arguments on the need
to uphold international law, specifically
the protection of diplomatic personnel in
foreign countries On th»s point the U.S.
can expect the support of the world
communities Iran, no doubt, will focus
its claims on the Shah's repressive rule
of 27 years which resulted in an untold
thousands of deaths at the hands of his
secret police as well as the embezzlement
of billions of dollars stolen from the
Iranian people while the Shah was in
power. The Shah is now perceived as a
“Hitler" by the Iranian masses and any
means to secure his return to Iran for
“trial” is justifiable. As Carter said, even
at the United Nations there is little
reason for optimism.
Clearly, this is a standoff that neither
side can afford to back out of gracefully.
Looking back with hindsight at the roots
of this crisis it is apparent that from the
beginning it was a no-win situation in
terms of United States prestige and
interest. In fact, American security has
been severely jeopardized and the
venomous anti-American fervor emerg
ing among the millions of Khomeini’s
supporters has the potential to spread to
neighboring Arab nations whose lifestyle
and culture are similarly based on Islam.
Of greatest concern to the U.S. is Saudi
Arabia which supplies 14 percent of the
United States’ oil.
Saudi Arabia’s form of government is
based on a feudal monarchy with central
powers controlled by the ruling family.
This type of government is just as
susceptible to overthrow, if not more so,
than the Shah’s government before
Khomeini came to power. Just in the last
few days we witnessed an attempt by a
fanatical Islamic group, proclaiming
allegiance with Khomeini, to take over
and hold hostages at the great Mosque in
Mecca, Saudi Arabia, the holiest site to
Islam.
Now the situation seems to be under
control, but it was a clear demonstration
that there is an opposing faction in Saudi
Arabia that has the potential as well as
the precedent to overthrow the existing
pro-American government to be replaced
by a fervently anti-American regime.
The consequences of such an occurrence
can only be seen as a severe threat to
American national security.
Let us not forget that in Iran we are
witnessing emphatic anti-Americanism
such as this country has ever seen This
is apparently a backlash against a
creeping of American culture, values,
and ideas into Iranian society which
perceives this influence as corrupt,
immoral, and a danger to Islam Hence,
there is an overwhelming rejection of
American and Western values, such as
respect for international law. Also, let us
not forget that a very similar situation of
American influence exists in Saudi
Arabia where an equally strong Islamic
force prevails. Just as the masses in Iran
are revolting against American influence
there, we cannot discount the possibility
of a continuing trend into Saudi Arabia.
It appears for now that in terms of
United States' interests, the situation can
only get worse. The United States is .
losing control of a once valuable ally with
the potential of losing more in that
strategic area of the world. To
complicate matters further, questions arc
now being raised by American allies in *
Western Europe and Japan concerning
the reliability of the U.S. as an ally.
Questions of this sort can only lead to a
more dangerous situation than the ’
present crisis.
The current developments in Iran and
Saudi Arabia should be a screaming
signal to the Carter administration to
begin an immediate process of lessening
the United States’ dependence on oil from
an obviously vulnerable and instable area
of the world. To reduce the United States’
dependence on Middle East oil, the
administration must concentrate its
efforts in several areas
First, the severity of the energy crisis .
must be made absolutely dear to the
American public and an all-out campaign
should be started to inform the public of
the necessity to reduce personal energy
consumption. Second, if oil exports art
needed (and they will be for years to
come), the U.S. should promote oil trade
with other countries, such as Mexico and
Venezuela. Third, a full scale effort
comparable to the Apollo lunar program
needs to be started immediately to find
safe, feasible, and reliable alternative
sources of energy Success with solar
energy has already been achieved on a
limited basis. The federal, government
should commit itself to pursuing the
potential of solar energy to its fullest
Tnere are obviously other means to
achieve decreased dependence on Middle
East oil that should tax the administra
tion’s imagination Success or failure on
this point, to a large extent will mark
Carter’s presidency as a success or
a failure
4
The United States should also hold firm
to its commitments to other allies around
the world. There will undoubtedly be a
barrage of anti-Israel and anti-Egypt .
rhetoric from Khomeini and his devoted
fanatics in the name of Allah But Carter
should remember that an Israel and
Egypt at peace without oil is much .
preferable to an Iran in anarchy with oil
The United States will continue to have a
great interest in a stable Middle East
From a Western point of view, religious
fanaticism of this kind is a hard thing to
comprehend About the only thing that
can be said with certainty about the
U.S.-Iran crisis is that we in the West do
not understand the dynamics of this *
Islamic revolution in Iran just as those in
Iran caught up in this revolution
apparently do not understand the West
m Hed and c BlacH.
Staff.
EgMarTa-chM Bill Krueger
EutMltf edlur Gary FouU
Gnml Muirr Slav* CratMU
FaterUiameat editor Bobby Byrd
Pbau editor C Talbot Nunnally III
>wts editor Norm Reilly
Promotions director Charles Russel!
Assists at nnip«i Nlun Chuck Reece. Catherine Rodrigue
Am tola at rtiy rdtoari Tim Bonner Salyiui Boyles
AM to la al feat am editor Scott Jacnbo
Am to la at entertainment editor Robert Holland
: Larry Cutctiall
_ Don White. Ed Lcgge
Wire editor Lewis Patterson
Doug Pradat. I > Wilson
IGA Today coordinator Tammy Savage
Editorial assistant: Nancy Nethery
Production manager Wendy Witnwski
Advertising representatives M r. Bake' ! er r>:f*es ? (l Be FWher M■/•belle Newberry
Advertising a>sistant Sally Nalles
Classified advertising manaaer (Tins Wills
Production Susan Turner Kenny York. Tern Edgar KPp Birmingham. Kathy Hughes
lh.- H.-.1 ami Rlatk *turf»nt newspaper .a the I mvrrsiiy .4 l/rocgi- Alhrn* 1- published r»*-*dai through
fnd.iv With the •■tuwpi m*i rvimiM«i<«i pern-d* and h-iidav* and pruned hy Wilke. Publish mg < .mpam
In. Washington taenia sev.anl vlaas 1* paid .n Athens p.»i Office Athene Georg,* »MH
npinioo* fvpri »«rd m The Red ami Hla. k other than unsigned editorial-, .ire the opinions of the writers nt
-laiMtl chirrin' or •••rt<»miMA and an n*a nei.-s.anlv Hvm- o| ihr I niiersifv Administration the Hoard ..I
It.-gent' or The Red and Hla. k
**«d internaioaial new. m The Red and Black 1* Inen the wires «d l mted Press International
Th. entire content* -It The Red and Hla. k an- iopv right tors The Red and Hla. k new .paper All right*
rs**rrv rd
SuhM-nprMNi rate ta *IT ••• per sear Information available at bto.ines* .glue* pm v« uit
Letters policy
letters will be printed as space permits The Red and Black reserves the righMn edit Inters for length and
libelous material Letters must
• he 1 sped double spaced on 1 60 space li
• include th«
r the name address and telephone number of the writer's' We can omit your name in print for a
valid reason
a be limited to «i lines
s be addressed To the editor The Red and Black 30k Journalism Athens, (leorgia 30NI
When submitting columns follow letter policy with length held to ion lines
Contacts
News contribution* are accepted hy telephone 1 404 *42-3441 at the editorial offices Jnurnalum Building
University of Georgia Inquires concerning advertising should he made al the business offices >404' *42 3414
(..rri-vpondence should he addressed la the appropriate editor at tm Journalism Building University <g
(Georgia Athens Georgia ««o}