Opinion
Closing chapters
Time to end worldwide hostage crisis
After nearly seven years, Terry Anderson, the last Ameri
can hostage in Lebanon, is free.
When Anderson entered a conference room at the
Syrian Foreign Ministry to address reporters Wednesday, he
waved his hands to the press and the rest of the world, and he
hugged one reporter.
Later, for the first time, Anderson wrapped an arm around
his daugher Sulome, bom three months after he was kidnapped
by Shiite Muslims.
These were the simple gestures of a freed human.
And, possibly, the end of an era that has seen 13 American
hostages held by pro-Iranian terrorists and three more killed in
captivity.
While he was imprisoned, Anderson missed out on many
changes. The turns of the world will be important to the
journalist in Anderson. He probably has never even heard of
David Duke. Or of stealth bombers. Or of “Dances With
Wolves.”
While Anderson remained in capitivity, the Cold War ended.
The Berlin wall crumbled. The United States reasserted its
military might. China posi
tioned itself as the world’s
Communist power.
All of these events, in
cluding the birth of his
daughter, were stripped away
from Anderson. He will never
get them back.
As Middle East leaders
meet in Washington this
* vr week, the resolution of the
American hostage crisis
should be in the back, not
Lisa Pytiik/DN front, of negotiators’ minds.
The releases are indeed a gesture of goodwill, but just as the
hostages’ captivity could not be used as a bargaining chip, their
(freedom should be given no special emphasis.
After all, Shiite Muslims still hold two German hostages and
. several Israeli prisoners. Israel ilself holds many Palestinians
under controversial circumstances.
Perhaps Anderson’s release will signal a victory for human
rights in the Middle East.
After more than 6 1/2 years in chains, that is the least his *
release should bring.
— J.P.
Dehyphenation promises
no staggering changes
I was the one University of Ne
braska at Omaha student government
senator who voted against the dchy
phenation of the University of Ne
braska-Lincoln. I thought it was just
plain silly. Sort of like holding our
breath until we turn blue.
The Daily Nebraskan is frequently
quoted in The Omaha World-Herald.
The UNO Gateway is never even
mentioned in The World-Herald. Even
if UNO student government could by
its own volition remove the hyphen
from UNL, our own school paper
would siill be a Mickey Mouse tab
loid. We would still be parking a mile
from campus and taking a bus to
class. We would still be the home
town, also-ran, wall-flower school
without dorms. One preposition more
or less isn’t going to change any of
that.
Our student court has declared
parking tickets at UNO invalid. Isn’t
that amazing? I guess the hyphen was
only the beginning.
Stephen Srt
Omalu
-EDITORIAL POLICY
Signed staff editorials represent
the official policy of the Fall 1991
Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by the
Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Its
members are: Jana Pedersen, editor;
Eric Pfanner, editorial page editor;
Diane Brayton, managing editor;
Walter Gholson, columnist; Paul
Domeier, copy desk chief; Brian
Shellito, cartoonist; Jeremy Fitzpa
trick, senior reporter.
Editorials do not necessarily re
flect the views of the university, its
employees, the students or the NU
Board of Regents.
Editorial columns represent the
opinion of the author.
The Daily Nebraskan’s publishers
are the regents, who established the
UNL Publications Board to super
vise the daily production of the pa
per.
According to policy set by the re
gents, responsibility for the editoria
content of the newspaper lies solel)
in the hands of its students.
-LETTER POLICY
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to the editor from all read
ers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publi
cation on the basis of clarity, original
ity, timeliness and space available.
The Daily Nebraskan retains the right
to edit all material submitted.
Readers also are welcome to sub
mit material as guest opinions.
Whether material should run as a let
ter or guest opinion, or not to run, is
left to the editor’s discretion.
Letters and guest opinions sent tc
the newspaper become the property
of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be
returned.
Anonymous submissions will not
be considered for publication. Let
ters should include the author’s
name, year in school, major and
group affiliation, if any. Requests to
withhold names will not be granted.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R
St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
DAVID REITER
Apologies from nations puzzling
There are lots of apologies these
days.
After the Clarence Thomas
hearings, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D
Mass., apologized for faults in his
private life. Sen. Alan Simpson, R
Wyo., apologized for being insensi
tive to the other side.
More recently, presidential candi
date Sen. Bob Kerrey, D-Neb., apolo
gized for telling an offensive joke.
After that, in an apparent attempt to
capitalize on Kerrey’s mistake, David
Beckwith, press secretary for Vice
President Dan Quaylc, told a joke
about Kerrey’s joke. He was informed
that h is joke was offensive, and he too
has apologized.
Now officials in the Japanese
government are saying that Japan’s
parliament will pass a formal resolu
tion apologizing to its former ene
mies. In an interview in The Wash
ington Post, Foreign Minister Michio
Watanabc expressed remorse over the
“unbearable suffering and sorrow”
inflicted on America by Japan.
There has also been discussion of
whether the United States should
apologize for dropping atomic bombs
on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is esti
mated that nearly 300,000 Japanese
were killed in those attacks.
In the interview, Watanabc said
the Japanese government is not seek
ing an apology from the United States.
But other Japanese officials have
suggested such an apology. Accord
ing to the Chicago Tribune, last year
Nabuo Ishihara, deputy chief cabinet
secretary .suggested the United States
should apologize for its attack on
Japan.
In a taped interview that aired
Sunday on ABC television, President
Bush rejected outright the idea of
•• making an apology to Japan: “Not
from this president. I was fighting
over there. I had orders to go back
there when the war was ended.”
The very notion of apologizing for
the attack on Japan is perplexing in a
variety of ways. For starters, can na
tions even make apologies?
Although nations cannot sneeze or
tear down a set of goalposts, there are
some actions nations can perform. IT
a nation has a legislative system, it
can impose a speed limit. If it has a
good selection of guns, tanks and
missiles, it can make war on its neigh
bor.
But doesn’t apologizing require
Although nations
cannot sneeze or tear
dtmiLa set of
eoalposts. there are
same actions, nations
can perform. If a
nation has a legisla
tive system, it can im
pose a speed limit, If -
it has a good selec
tion oi guns- tanks
and missiles, it can
make me on ils
neighbor.
But doesn’t anoln
eizine require special
equipment?
special equipment? Doesn’t it require
something like a heart? Something
that can feel remorse or sorrow over
past actions? Do nations have this
sort of thing?
Even ignoring this question, there
arc other perplexities.
An apology ought to be sincere.
In part, this means that it should
flow from a genuine conviction that
the action performed was wrong. Our
nation may be utterly convinced that
dropping the bomb had horrible ef
fects, but we do not have a genuine
conviction that dropping the bomb
was morally wrong.
While there arc some who claim
that the action was wrong, many
Americans hold that it was morally
justified. For a national apology to be
sincere, this disagreement would have
to be resolved.
But sincerity requires more than a
bare acknowledgement of wrongdo
ing. It also requires that the giving of
an apology is genuine. We arc all too
familiar with the fact that empty or
purely formal apologies are some
times given as mere tools for reach
ing desired ends.
It would be wrong to use an apol
ogy as a tool to gain better trade
relations with Japan. It also would be
wrong to apologize just for the sake
of projecting the “right image” to the
world community.
Finally, it is unclear whether apolo
gies are even appropriate in this con
text. If someone accidentally steps on
your foot, an apology is appropriate.
If someone insults you, an apology is
appropriate. But as the offense be
comes more and more serious, the
role of apologies seems to become
less clear.
The atomic bomb was dropped on
Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The action
was horrible, and this can be recog
nized even if one thinks it was mor
ally justified. It is precisely because
this action was so massively horrible
that there is something strange about
the very suggestion that someone
should, or even could, apologize for
it.
So the notion of apologizing is
perplexing.
On the other hand, there is nothing
perplexing about the desirability of
peace. We should want very much to
turn old enemies into new friends.
But there arc different ways of
attempting to jlo this. One way is to
try to bring about healing through
official proclamations and apologies.
Another way is to let it happen through
individual relationships.
Last week, the Chicago Tribune
told the story of Iwao Fujiwara and
Richard Fiske.
Fiske is a survivor of the Japanese
attack on the USS West Virginia,
while Fujiwara is president of a
wholesale clothing company in Ja
pan.
Fujiwara was one of 350 Japanese
pilots who carried out the attack on
Pearl Harbor. His plane scored a di
rect hit on the USS West Virginia.
Recently, Fujiwara visited Pearl
Harbor. In tears, he embraced Rich
ard Fiske.
The only way to conduct a war is
from the top down. But healing is
different. It is best approached from
the bottom up.
Reiter is a grad uate student In philosophy
and a Daily Nebraskan columnist.
