Opinion
Same old song
AS UN candidates need new tunes
In 1990,16.3 percent of University of Nebraska-Lincoln
students voted in student government elections. In 1989,
turnout was 11.7 percent; in 1988, 13.1 percent.
Ask typical students why they forfeited their votes, and
they’ll tell you they don’t think the Association of Students of
the University of Nebraska does much for them. When an or
ganization doesn’t do much, it doesn’t matter who runs it,
they’ll say.
Apparently, no one has told that to this year’s ASUN
executive candidates. In the two debates so far this year, they
have taken on just about every university issue, made the usual
promises and left their audiences with the usual shaking heads.
About the only issue the candidates haven’t offered their advice
on is the future of the Middle East.
une party nas promised 10 ciiea cnange wun an umum
student vote on the NU Board of Regents. Of course, that
parly’s candidates didn’t bother to say how they would get the
official vote.
They forgot to mention that changing the voting structure of
the regents would be a complicated process, requiring input
from the board and approval from the Legislature and Nebraska
voters. Even under the most favorable circumstances, there’s
no way next year’s executives will have an official vote.
Candidates can make the vote a campaign issue, but it won’t
be a means to put other issues into effect. Not next year, at
least.
Another party discussed the Nebraska Legislature as if state
senators were just waiting for ASUN’s word before passing
bills. Granted, ASUN, through its Government Liaison Com
mittee, can lobby senators and present a student point of view.
But ASUN, despite some candidates’ exhortations to the
contrary, will not make,state law.
Another party with executive candidates says the answer to
all of UNL students’ problems is to open up better “lines of
communication.’’ The party even has a clever acronym for its
public relations plan.
Try something new. Every year, ASUN election groups
promise belter communication. Every year, they fail to realize
that effective communication should not be a political issue.
Poor communicators simply should not run for office.
M>rry, candidates, you can t singicnanocuiy raise lacuuy
salaries, appropriate UNL’s budget or change the way the
regents vote. You can’t tell students over and over again that
you will help them. Leadership requires action.
Effective representation of UNL’s students means initiating
creative plans for ASUN, rather than reacting to administrative
and legislative proposals and rehashing the rhetoric of past
campaigns.
All of the parties have interesting, student-oriented ideas on
their platforms this year. For example, all the parlies have
taken a stand on one group's idea to name a Martin Luther
King Jr. holiday. Unfortunately, such discussion so far has
been drowned in a sea of unrealistic promises.
With nine days and several debates left before the elections,
| it’s high time to get some of those issues into the open. And, of
course, high time to start passing the balloons and Jolly Ranch
ers.
— H.F.P.
-LETTERS™ EDITOR
Americans must be informed
I am writing regarding the article
about Mike Farrell's speech on hu
man rights (DN, Feb. 28). The article
told only of Mr. Farrell’s position in
the Persian Gulf war and did not do
justice to the full scope of his presen
tation.
Mr. Farrell’s support for human
rights goes further than the gulf war.
This was shown by his reaction to an
announcement that President Bush
had called for a cease-fire in the gulf
war. Mr. Farrell’s immediate response
was “Thank God,’’ but he pointed out
that the issue he is concerned with is
larger than this immediate conflict.
He is concerned with human rights
violations everywhere in the world.
The article also mentioned that
people should fight censorship, but
did not clearly connect this censor
ship with our government, which does
not always present a complete story
to the American people.
A clear example of the govern
ment suppressing information was
shown by the Iran-Contra scandal.
Mr Farrell said that if the American
public had known ol this, it would
have insisted that the government stop
these activities. He pointed out that
the Iranians knew they were getting
arms, and the Contras knew they were
getting money, and asked why didn’t
the American public know all of this
was happening.
The gulf war is simply a current
example of the government carefully
regulating the flow of information
given to the American people. We
need to realize that this sort of gov
ernmental censorship occurs on a
regular basis, and that we should nol
blindly accept all of our government’s
activities. The American people have
a right to know the reasons for the
actions taken by our government.
Americans should be given the rea
sons for our government’s actions
and then we may decide on our own
whether or not to support these ac
tions.
Greg Johnson
first yea:
College of Law
There's someone here
7o SEE yog MR VResiT>eNT.
HE WAHts you Tc
prepare For the Mother -
OF All chores.
JANA PEDERSEN
Peace declared prematurely
President Bush declared peace
in the Persian Gulf on Wednes
day, but the Christmas lights
in my neighborhood have yet to come
down.
The lights went up long before
Christmas, as a symbol of hope for
world peace and goodwill toward
others.
At a Lincoln woman’s suggestion,
the lights remained up as a symbol of
hope that Iraqi troops would pull out
ofKuwaitby Bush’s Jan. 15 deadline.
When that deadline passed, the
lights were supposed to stay up until
Iraqi troops pulled out of Kuwait.
Now they still shine nightly, and
will continue to shine until the U.S.
troops come home.
Ninety-four percent of Nebraskans,
in an Omaha World-Herald poll, said
they supported Bush’s actions in the
gulf. But I look at those Christmas
lights and disagree.
Some of the U.S. troops, though
far fewer than most of us imagined,
won’t be coming home, and that makes
the war drag on in my mind, regard
less of the latest news that Iraq will
accept the allied peace plan.
Pictures of allied prisoners of war
in Iraq flash across the television screen
WIUI I ^ JA.JI Uldl (MIMJIICI CAtlldllgCS
are al the lop of ihc peace plan.
Bui another report tells that two
British prisoners may have been killed
in captivity, and no one is willing to
speculate on how many others may
have been killed or tortured. That
alone is enough to make me question
the war.
The now-freed citizens of Kuwait
praise allied troops and speak in soft
voices about their dead loved ones —
those who dared to stand up to Iraqi
troops.
No doubt, as the new American
ambassador to Iraq put it Saturday,
such things arc “atrocious atrocities.”
But once this peace has settled dow n,
I wonder what Baghdad will look like
and if the destruction there is atro
cious, too.
Whether the Iraqis’ inhumane treat
ment of people in Kuwait is more
atrocious than the allies’ ceaseless
barrage of less-than-surgical strikes
Some of_ the U.S.
troops, thoueh far
fewer than most of
US. imagined, mull
be comine home.
and that makes the
war atae on in mv
mind, regardless of
the latest news that
Iraq will accept the
allied peace plan.
has yet to be determined.
Iraq launched Scud missile attacks
in desperation at civilian targets, but
allied bombs hit civilian targets loo.
Both kinds of attacks drew blood.
Long-term disputes between Ar
abs and non-Arabs, between some
Arabs and other Arabs weren’t an
swered by this war either. In fact,
Saudi Arabia now is under fire from
some of its Arab neighbors for being
too un-Arab. Some Arabs still are
upset by post-World War I allied
politics in the region and arc angry
with Saudi Arabia for siding with the
allies.
To Americans, Iraq started the war
when it invaded Kuwait. But in Iraqi
eyes, the battle began at the end of
World War I when allied forces failed
to give Iraq a port on the Persian Gulf.
Sadly, U.S. government and mili
tary reports fail to offer both sides of
the story, so 94 percent support for
Bush’s actions shouldn’t come as a
surprise.
U.S. military censorship was at its
highest during the Persian Gulf war,
higher than at any other time in this
century, leaving journalists scram
bling to provide up-to-the-minute,
acc urate coverage of events, and leav
ing the American public more skepti
cal of the media than of the govern
ment reports.
The problem with 94 percent sup
port is that the statistic alone fails to
acknowledge that the American pub
lic might not yet be in a position to
give its support. There is much left to
be learned about the war that ended so
mercifully soon.
When scholars argue that the war
was just because it brought about the
desired end — peace — it’s impor
tant to remember that there is not yet
peace in the region. Bombs may no
longer rain down on Baghdad, but
clashes between groups of Arabs in
the area arc far from ended. In some
instances, the war may only have
heightened tension.
When conservatives make fun of
nr/xtnrtAro 11/ K/\ rhanlpH l4Nn HIOO(i
for oil,” it’s important to remember
that blood was shed on both sides o!
the battle. Iraqi Scuds killed Israeli
civilians and American soldiers. Al
lied “smart” bombs destroyed more
than just buildings. Before allied troops
leave the area, more blood surely will
be shed accidentally.
When Americans point to the “easy’
allied victory and boast, “Who will
dare stand up to us now?” it’s impor
tant to remember that World War 1
was cal led the war to end all wars. Yet
World War I has been named by Iraqis
and other Arab countries as one of the
causes of the war we just ended.
And when my neighbors get the
chance to take down their Christmas
lights, it will be most important to
remember why they were put up in
the first place.
We’ve not yet found peace on earth
or goodwill toward others.
Pedersen Is a Junior advertising nm)or, *
Dally Nebraskan associate news editor and a
columnist.
-EDITORIAL POLICY-—
Initialed editorials represent of
ficial policy of the spring 1991
Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by
the editorial board.
The Daily Nebraskan’s pub
Ushers are the NU Board of Re
gents, who established the Univer
sity of Nebraska-Lincoln Publica
tions Board to supervise daily pro
duction of the paper. According to
the regents’ policy, responsibility
for the editorial content lies solely
in the hands of the newspaper’s
student editors.