North Carolina Newspapers is powered by Chronam.
12 The Daily Tar Heel Wednesday, November 5, 1986
94th year of editorial freedom
JIM ZOOK, Editor
Randy Farmer, Managing Editor
ED BRACKETT, Associate Editor
DEWEY MESSER, Associate Editor
Tracy Hill, News Editor
Grant Parsons, university Editor
LINDA MONTANARI, City Editor
JILL GERBER, State and National Editor
Scott Fowler, sports Editor .
KATHY PETERS, Features Editor
ROBERT KEEFE, Business Editor
Elizabeth Ellen, Arts Editor
DAN CHARLSON, Photography Editor
Alien law no solution
For the signing of such landmark
legislation as the immigration bill,
there was a distinct lack of hurrahs
last week but there was little cause
Immigration reform has been
needed to control the flood of illegal
aliens into the United States, most
entering from across the Mexican
border. The aliens usually are under
paid, poorly housed and exploited by
employers while U.S. law almost
encourages the exploitation: it is illegal
for aliens to be in this country, but
not against the law to hire them.
The law provides amnesty for some
illegal immigrants. It penalizes
employers who knowingly hire illegal
aliens the theory being that with
few available jobs, foreigners will be
discouraged from entering the coun
try. But after five years of compromise
and revision, the watered-down legis
lation temporarily addresses a prob
lem at the expense of immigration
officials, legal aliens and businesses.
Besides its regular duties, the INS
must process amnesty requests from
4 million illegal aliens (plus 8 million
to 12 million relatives) and the 400,000
migrant farm workers allowed to
work. To qualify, illegal immigrants
must prove U.S. residecny since Jan.
1, 1982. But experts estimate that more
than 3 million people have entered the
United States illegally since then, and
the INS must still hunt them down.
Businessmen aware of the severe
fines that can be levied may use
the law as an excuse not to hire legal
aliens or minorities. Recognizing that
danger, the new law also prohibits
refusal to hire job candidates just
because they are not U.S. citizens. The
provision will be difficult to enforce.
For those illegal immigrants willing
to come forward, the legislation means
protection against exploitation. But
many believe even those eligible for
amnesty will not apply, out of long
held fear of federal officials.
The new law, while better than its
predecessor, treats a deep wound with
a band-aid. Congress must decide
whether the aliens benefit the Amer
ican economy by taking jobs no one
else wants, or if they take jobs from
Americans at less-than-legal pay. The
answer could initiate a desperately
needed long-term policy if more
work passes should be granted or
Congress should better fund the INS.
Otherwise, Congress may have to
offer another blanket amnesty in
another 15 vears.
Hostages pawns in larger game
U.S. hostage David Jacobsen was
released Sunday after an incredible 17
months of captivity in Lebanon. The
reasons for his freedom remain ambig
uous. Of course, in the turmoil
wracked world of Lebanese politics,
ambiguity is the order of the day.
Jacobsen was kidnapped in May
1985 by Shiite Moslems of the pro
Iranian faction Islamic Jihad. The
kidnappers hoped to procure the
release of Jihad soldiers imprisoned in
Kuwait for bombing the U.S. and
French embassies. Those soldiers are
still in jail; as a result, Islamic Jihad
continues to hold at least two Amer
icans hostage. Nineteen foreigners are
reported held hostage in Lebanon.
One of the more fascinating aspects
of Jacobsen's release is the role of
Anglican Church emissary Terry
Waite. Waite serves as chief negotiator
with Jihad and helped free Jacobsen.
But his part in the drama reveals the
entire Lebanese political situation as
a huge chess game.
In this game, fought on the board
of world sentiment, the hostages are
the pawns. Waite has thus become the
instrument through which both the
Shiites and the United States attempt
to control those pawns.
Islamic Jihad issued a statement
following Jacobsen's release saying,
"We remind the (American people)
that we will adopt a different policy
line if the U.S. government does not
continue its overtures to achieve the
desired results." The statement pic
tures Jacobsen's freedom as a reward
for some unstated U.S. action. Not
surprisingly, the United States denied
such overtures were made, but
i emphasized its own role in patiently
working with Waite for the release.
When the Soviet Union arrested
U.S. reporter Nicholas Daniloff, the
United States quickly negotiated for
his release. Families of the Lebanese
hostages used the Daniloff case to
argue that the Reagan administration
could and should do the same with
Islamic Jihad and the other groups.
The reality of the situation, though,
as demonstrated by Sunday's
announcement, is that the United
States has no power, no authority in
Lebanon. The hostages can look only
to their captors for the hope of
freedom. And the inscrutability of
Islamic Jihad makes such freedom a
capricious prospect indeed.
Often, events like a hostage release
are probed for a greater significance.
But JacobserTs release has little
meaning other than the importance of
one man's freedom. To search for
anything more is to search in vain.
The Daily Tar Heel
Editorial Writer: Kathy Nanney
Editorial Assistant: Nicki Weisensee
Omnibus Editor: Sallie Krawcheck
Assistant Managing Editors: Jennifer Cox, Amy Hamilton, Donna Leinwand and Regan Murray.
News: Jeanna Baxter, Stephanie Burrow, Charlotte Cannon, Chris Chapman, Paul Cory, Sabrina Darley,
Kimberly Edens, Michelle Efird, Jennifer Essen, Jeannie Faris, Scott Greig, Maria Haren, Nancy
Harrington, Suzanne Jeffries, Susan Jensen, Sharon Kebschull, Michael Kolb, Teresa Kriegsman, Laura
Lance, Alicia Lassiter, Mitra Lotfi, Brian Long, Justin McGuire, Karen McManis, Laurie Martin,
Toby Moore, Dan Morrison, Felisa Neuringer, Rachel Orr, Fred Patterson, Liz Saylor, Sheila Simmons,
Rachel Stiffler, Elisa Turner, Beth Williams, Robert Wilderman and Bruce Wood. Jo Fleischer and
Jean Lutes, assistant university editors. Donna Leinwand, assistant state and national editor. Cindy
Clark, Ruth Davis and Michael Jordan, wire editors.
Sports: Mike Berardino, James Surowiecki and Bob Young, assistant sports editors. Bonnie Bishop,
, Greg Cook, Phyllis Fair, Laura Grimmer, Clay Hodges, Greg Humphreys, Lorna Khalil, Eddy Landreth,
Mike Mackay, Jill Shaw and Wendy Stringfellow.
Features: Jessica Brooks, Julie Braswell, Eleni Chamis, Robbie Dellinger, Carole Ferguson, Jennifer
Frost, Jennifer Harley, Jeanie Mamo, Corin Ortlam, Lynn Phillips, Katie White, Mollie Womble and
Arts: James Burrus, David Hester, Alexandra Mann, Rene Meyer, Beth Rhea, Kelly Rhodes and Rob
Photography: Charlotte Cannon, Larry Childress, Jamie Cobb, Tony Deifell, Janet Jarman and Julie
Copy Editors: Karen Anderson, assistant news editor. Dorothy Batts, Beverly Imes, Lisa Lorentz, Sherri
Murray, Sally Pearsall, Marielle Stachura and Joy Thompson.
Editorial Cartoonists: Adam Cohen, Bill Cokas and Trip Park.
Campus Calendar: Mindelle Rosenberg and David Starnes.
Business and Advertising: Anne Fulcher, general manager; Patricia Benson, advertising director; Mary
Pearse, advertising coordinator. Angela Ostwalt, business manager; Cammie Henry, accounts receivable
clerk; Michael Benfield, advertising manager; Ruth Anderson, Michael Benfield, Jennifer Garden, Kelli
McElhaney, Chrissy Mennitt, Beth Merrill, Anne Raymer, Julie Settle, Peggy Smith, Kent Sutton,
Ashley Waters, and Layne Poole advertising representatives; Tammy Norris, Angie Peele, Stephanie
Chesson, classified advertising representatives; and Mary Brown, secretary.
Distributioncirculation: William Austin, manager.
Production: Elizabeth Rich and Stacy Wynn. Rita Galloway, production assistant.
DI woe't solve arms race problem
I he Strategic Defense Initiative (or
Star Wars) is an abstract idea with
JUL vital implications. President Reagan
is sold on SDI and is doing his best to sell
the idea to the American people. Congress
has appropriated 13 billion dollars over the
past four fiscal years for basic research; no
one knows how much SDI will eventually
cost, but the amount will surely be in the
hundreds of billions of dollars.
The politically savvy folks connected with
SDI have said they want to put SDI money
into every state, creating the biggest pork
barrel project in history. If this happens, SDI
will be very difficult to stop a few years down
the road. We therefore need to cut through
the rhetoric surrounding the issue and
consider it carefully.
One thing Star Wars almost certainly
cannot be is the leakproof "peace shield"
that President Reagan fondly insists will
protect American cities. Even the director
of the SDI Office, Lt. Gen. James Abra
hamson, admits that Star Wars is designed
to protect U.S. missiles. But unless it can
be made 100 percent effective, SDI will not
be an acceptable defense against a Soviet
first-strike; the Soviets could defeat it any
number of ways with existing technology,
including simply building more missiles.
However, SDI might be valuable in a U.S.
first strike and might greatly reduce
incoming missies. In other words, it could
be used as an offensive system. The
technological fine points merely suggest that
the popular perception of SDI is flawed.
Our argument is that SDI is an attempt to
construct a technological solution to a non
technological problem the arms race
and is doomed to failure.
To paraphrase a popular conservative
argument: missiles don't kill people, people
kill people. While missiles can be used to
kill lots of human beings very efficiently and
anonymously, the missiles themselves are
neither moral or immoral. Making missiles
unusable will accomplish nothing if the will
to use them still exists.
History shows that new technology has
never produced anything but a temporary
advantage for one side, with an overall
escalation in the economic and social costs
of the arms race. Rather than working down
from the current level of armament to create
a more stable world, Star Wars seeks to
create a stable escalation, which seems
unlikely to be successful.
If we test and eventually deploy SDI, the
Soviet Union may do the same five to 10
years later. History also shows us that the
interim periods between technological gains
tend to be less stable. Parity, not superiority,
has proven to be safest for both countries
in a nuclear world.
Star Wars is therefore a wrongheaded and
destabilizing approach to controlling of
nuclear weapons. So, taking what we know
about each other into account, what is the
Realpolitiik of arms control for the United
States and the Soviet Union? The pragmatic
solution seems to be a continuation of the
We mean not only summits, but U.S.
Soviet contact on every political level. High
level summits are very positive, but impor
tant groundwork is laid in lower-level
meetings. In the 1970s, the SALT treaties
provided diplomatic avenues for resolving
problems over compliance. But during the
Reagan administration, these lower-level
contacts have been sharply reduced.
Until the early 1980s, every question that
arised was resolved to the satisfaction of U.S.
committee members. Early in his first term,
President Reagan suspended this lower-level
diplomacy, preferring to voice his com
plaints in the media. The talks at Geneva
are a very positive step, and we applaud
the administration's effort to resume the
arms control struggle in summits.
However, we must be willing to comprom
ise. If we go into a negotiation unwilling
to put everything on the table at some level,
we are not negotiating in good faith. The
current attitude that "if the Soviets want it,
it can't be good for us" is naive and
shortsighted. We should never accept a
treaty which puts us at a strategic disad
vantage, nor should we expect the Soviets
to do so.
The Soviets' Reykjavik offer gave the
United States everything it has wanted for
years: open verification of missile sites, real
reductions in Euromissiles and potentially
deep strategic cuts. The price for this was
an agreement to keep Star Wars in the
laboratory for 10 years not to kill
development of the program but to delay
Reagan's commitment to SDI was so
strong that he flatly refused the Soviet
proposal on this single condition. He is
obviously a true believer in the ability of
Star Wars to end the threat of nuclear war.
While his faith defies all reason, the popular
conception of SDI is one hell of a symbol,
and the Great Communicator has shown a
grasp of the importance of symbolism.
As long as the public believes, as Reagan
does, that Star Wars will make them safer
(just as they have believed all along that the
arms race was necessary for their safety),
we will escalate and bring the world closer
to destruction. It's time to halt escalation
and work for verifiable reductions of nuclear
weapons. That's the pragmatic way to
improve our safety.
The only certain result of an ongoing,
intensive SDI research and testing is
escalating the arms race, with attendant
political instability. The path of SDI is wide
and seductive compared to the steep and
narrow road of negotiation and comprom
ise. It is the latter road, however, that offers
the only promise of reduced nuclear threat
and lasting peace.
We encourage Ronald Reagan to look
toward the difficult and arduous political
solutions, rather than the false promises of
SDI. He must be willing to make fair
tradeoffs in hardware to solve the human
problem of nuclear weapons.
Adam Falk is a senior physics major from
Chapel Hill and a member of Students
Taking Action for Nuclear Disarmament.
Barry Campbell is a junior English major
To the editor:
The South African situation
worsens with every headline it
generates. UNC students look
on and want to ameliorate the
pain felt by South African
blacks. However, South Africa
is moving toward a system of
equality for all, without regard
to race. But when this new
South Africa arrives, will the
blacks be prepared?
South Africa spends eight
times as much to educate a
white child as it does for a black
child. A white who seeks col
lege funding usually gets it.
Blacks who are admitted to
colleges can rarely go because
they barely have enough money
to meet basic needs.
The result is that blacks are
largely uneducated or undered
ucated. When "one man, one
vote" is instated, blacks may
find themselves sadly lacking
qualified candidates to fill
The South African Scholar
ship Fund, a new Campus Y
committee, seeks to provide an
education for future black
leaders now, thus helping to
safeguard that country's future.
Members of the Board of
Trustees have agreed to match
what we can raise within the
next two years, up to $50,000.
This $100,000 will be placed in
an Endowment Fund at a 10
percent annual interest rate.
The interest will be sent every
year to the South African
Institute of Race Relations,
which will handle the allocation
This institute is a non
government, non-profit organ
ization seeking to foster non
violent processes of change
towards democracy in South
Africa. Its only stance is anti
apartheid. Candidates seeking
to go to college in South Africa
are eligible if they meet finan
cial need and academic eligi
bilty requirements. Scholar
ships will be awarded
regardless of sex, race, religion
or political affiliation.
With our $100,000 endow
ment, we will be able to finance
four students for each year as
necessary. When the fund is no
longer needed, it will provide
scholarships to North Carolina
residents to attend UNC.
Efforts to raise funds will be
focused on corporations in
UNC's portfolio that do bus
iness in South Africa, the
Chapel Hill area and the Uni
versity community itself. This
is a project of students, by
students and for students. The
involvement of the student
body as a whole is important
for the attainment of this rather
There will be a table in the
Pit on Wednesday. SASF T
shirts will be on sale and there
will be a sign-up sheet for all
people interested in volunteer
ing a little time. Donations will
NOT be refused. Maybe
TIM B&OY HILL
TERRY SANF0RD D
BRUCE WILLIS "HP
J 1 1 1 1 K'l CHAfclSMA,
The Daily Tar Heel welcomes reader com
ment. For style and clarity, we ask that you
observe the following guidelines for letters to the
editor and columns:
B All letters I columns must be signed by the
author(s). Limit of two signatures per letter or
H Students who submit letters columns
should also include their name, year in school,
major and phone number. Professors and other
University employees should include their title
D All letters columns must be typed. (For
easier editing, we ask that they be double-spaced
on a 60-space line.)
D The Daily Tar Heel reserves the right to
edit letters and columns for style, grammar and
together, we can make South
Africa a better place to live.
To the editor:
It troubled me to see the
editorial, "Fundamental faith,
freedom," in the Oct. 29 Daily
Tar Heel. The writer stated that
Judge Hull's decision to permit
children to skip reading classes
that used material alien to their
religious beliefs was flawed, as
it might lead to "cafeteria"
education, and that education
must foster respect for all
opinions without denying the
validity of others.
He further stated that limits
advocated by a spokeman for
the fundamentalist group have
no place in the public education
system, and that an alternative
is to place children in private
I see two problems with this
approach. First, the fundamen
talist position is that the mate
rials used are oppose to their
beliefs. Even if we don't have
a problem with the same items,
their plight is in the same
category as children of atheists
being forced to participate in
school prayer, or children of
Mennonites being forced to
participate in school sponsored
pro-military activities, such as
ROTC. We do not have the
right to deny others freedom of
religious expression, even if we
don't agree with their religion.
Secondly, to offer private
educationn as an option is
problematic. Not all parents
have the financial resources to
send their children to private
school, but their lack of funds
should not negate their right of
freedom of religious expres
sion. If Judge Hull's decision
is overturned, however, this
may be the practical result.
Good, clean fun
To the editor:
In response to Mark Good
("Get primeval," Oct. 27), I
wish to address a few issues.
Monsieur Good, did you
know that almost 34 of UNC's
student population cannot
legally drink and act like "pri
mordial beasts?" If the Union
Social Committee ever plans to
have a campus get together
with "real bands" and offer
alcohol, I guess that 34 of the
so-called "underage geeks" at
this great institution will not be
able to attend.
I am a "self-respecting Carol
ina student" and when one isn't
old enough for drinking, there
is nothing better to do than act
like an immature kid and have
some good, clean fun. There
were actually some seniors
yes, seniors having a good
time playing those inane Twis
ter games and hopping up and
down on pogo sticks. The All
Campus Bash sponsored by the
Union proves that we can
actually have a good time
without being in a drunken
stupor. As a matter of fact, I
believe that I saw Good trying
to hide his grinning counte
nance while attempting to put
his right hand on the red circle
under a female's rear end.
Also, Good obviously forgot
that besides S, G, and L's stellar
performance, another band
played. This band, The White
Animals, one of Chapel Hill's
favorite progressive rock
bands, had UNC students rock
ing so hard that our Union's
ceiling nearly fell through.
Just because a band origi
nated at UVa, one of UNC's
arch-rivals, doesn't mean that
they cannot be good. Spiedel,
Goodrich and Lille are three
very" talented guys that please
audiences with their music at'
many colleges around the East
For those that agree with
Good's article attacking the
"crap" that went on at the
Union Bash, open your narrow
minds. Just a few years ago,
you also did not have the
privalege of drinking legally.
And congratulations to Alex
Dickey, Director of the Union
Social Committee; he and his
committee put in a lot of time
and effort to provide UNC
students with a good time. I
enjoyed the bash and both
bands, but please don't take
Mark Good's advice to have a
Care Bear Movie Festival.
' DANNY ROSIN
Early Childhood Education