Oregon daily emerald., August 21, 1974, Page 4, Image 4

-editorials
U.S. should halt aid to South Korea
They command the national defense
with their golf club in their left hand
While fondling the breasts of their mistresses
with their right
—from Kim Chi Ha's "Five Bandits.”
White the eyes of last week's world focused
on the death of his wife. South Korean
President Park Chung Hee added fuel to the fire
of tyranny he ignited in 1972. The United
States, through some $300 million in aid, is
helping Park in his tyranny.
The oppression began in 1972 when the
South Korean constitution was abrogated. To
criticize the government is now a crime
punishable by death. The death sentence can
even be handed out to students who cut
classes or examinations without adequate
reason.
Since January, 280 cirtics of the government,
most of them students, have been arrested
under Park's harsh rule. The most notable of
those sentenced to death is South Korea's best
known poet, Kim Chi Ha. Kim, 33, has been one
of Park's targets since the 1970 publication of
his poem "Five Bandits.” In April, Kim was
arrested and tried for allegedly providing $5,400
to student agitators. Three weeks ago his
sentence was reduced to life imprisonment
Park has repeatedly justified the measures as
a defense against Communist aggression. A
better bet is that his actual motive is the
elimination of domestic opponents.
Saturday night Park told the Korean press his
investigators had concluded that the
assasination attempt which claimed his wife
was ordered by the president of Communist
North Korea, Kim II Sung. Monday, Sung
refuted the charge.
Whether the North Korean president ordered
the attempt or not, Park was able to point to it
as further evidence of communist influence in
his country-further justifying his oppressive
measures.
And Park's repression is causing in
ternational reaction. The conviction of two
Japanese citizens-Yoshiharu Hayakawa, 37, a
language instructor, and Masaki Tachikawa, 28,
a freelance journalist—has caused a rift in
Japanese-Korean relations. The two were
sentenced to 20 years in prison for aiding North
Korean and Japanese Communists in the
Seoul student anti-government movement.
Japan, which provided 93 per cent of South
Korea’s foreign investment last year, has hinted
that its entire Korean policy is under review.
The U.S. should also review. Section 32 of
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1973 states: "it is
the sense of Congress that the President should
deny any economic or military assistance to the
government of any foreign country which
practices the internment or imprisonment of
that country's citizens for political purposes."
South Korea clearly falls into this stipulation.
But despite this, America's former number
one hero (enter Gerald Ford), Secretary of
State Henry Kissenger, said in Senate
testimony that the administration has decided
to authorize $300 million in economic and
military aid "even when we would not
recommend the actions of the government of
South Korea." His reason: "where we believe
the national interest is at stake, we proceed
even when we don't approve."
So it's the national interest song again. Look
where it has gotten us:
— It was in the national interest to aid in
combating Greek insurgents during the Truman
administration.
— It was in the national interest to enter the
Korean conflict over 20 years ago.
— It was in the name of national interest
(interchangable with security from now on) to
invade Cuba in 1961.
— It was in the national interest to escalate
the war in Viet Nam.
— It was in the national interest to keep from
the American public countless revealing
documents in the Watergate cover-up.
And now rt s in the national interest to
support a government which is in direct op
position to the beliefs of our founding fathers
and even many public servants today.
If we are ever going to break this deeply
grooved record, the Congress will have to dc
the breaking.
The Congress of two years ago would un
doubtedly fall in line behind the administration.
The Congress of today, hopefully, is different.
The Watergate investigations left Congress
with a new-found vitality and has many people
rooting for the Congress to stay on its toes. A
good first step would be to override the ad
ministration on the South Korean issue.
Congressmen and women should ask
themselves if it would be in the national interest
to fight for the Park regime in the event that
anti-government forces or Communist North
Koreans decide to attack the Park regime. If the
answer is no, then aid should be cut-off
promptly — for three reasons:
— The similarities between Viet Nam 15 years
ago and the present Korean situation are
alarming. The Congress should realize that it is
much easier for an administration to wage war
on behalf of a country that receives aid from
the U.S. than for a country that does not. With
the growing dissent among South Koreans and
Park's constant jabs at North Korea, the
prospect of war is becoming quite real.
— The United States shouldn't economically
and militrarify support a country which holds
ideals and practices practices which are in
opposition to our own.
— With this country's money shrinking, we
should be more selectrve in doling out dollars.
It's expensive in terms of lives (the U.S. has
38,000 military personnel in South Korea) and
money to support an unwanted government
against the will of its people.
Kissenger says we can't afford not to support
South Korea. The fact is, we can't afford to
support governments like South Korea's.
But here we sit in Eugene, Oregon discussing
foreign aid. If you have an opinion and want it
heard where it will do some good, try writing
your Congressman or woman or one of our
Senators. After all, it is an election year.
DH
Unfair prices
The Lane County Fair, billed by local media
as “the best entertainment buy in town,"
turned out to be a bust for students on a limited
budget.
Admission was $1.50 for adults and
university students. Adult rides went for 45 and
60 cents. A cup of coffee cost 20 cents. And
the Fair Board imposed the prices on groups
which sought to charge less.
If a person was interested in the exhibits or
the shows only, the Fair could be seen as a
good buy. But a person wishing to spend an
hour riding rides and eating would have to
spend $5 to $10.
By comparison, an excellent comedy
double-feature showing downtown provided
three hours of enjoyment at a student cost of
$2. I know, I opted for the movie after seeing
the "Fair" prices.
The Fair Board should take into account the
student plight, and charge accordingly.
DH
__J
-opinion-—
Tennessee Valley Authority stooping to new lows
BY NICHOLAS VON HOFFMAN
WASHINGTON (KFS>— The Tennessee
Valley Authority, once the originator of
many good ideas but now long since gone
to sleep, has come up with an innovative
wrinkle. It is now charging people for in
formation about its operations. For every
hour a clerk must spend checking the files
for data, the inquirer is billed $6.75.
By way of explanation, Paul Evans, TVA's
public information officer, says, "We are
relatively new in complying with the
Freedom of Information Act, but when it
starts to intrude on our regular operations
we have to do something."
The idea of having government agencies
charge for the news they put out is so
startling we might dismiss it without
considering its merits. One of the reasons
that the media is clogged with in
consequential junk, which neither en
tertains not informs, is that we get all our
stuff free. If we had to pay for information,
economics would force us to exercise a
more stringent selectivity. Would we print
the cartloads of stuff and feathers that Ron
Ziegler has been dumping on us for years if
we had to pay for it? Another benefit is
that, if government agencies and politicians
thought they could profit by selling news
they would have an incentive to offer a
higher-quality product than the sawdust
they currently give away.
In the TVA's instance, however, the $6.75
arvhour charge was leveled against Jim
Branscame of Letcher County, Kentucky's
"Mountain Eagle" weekly newspaper
because, one suspects, the Authority's
authorities knew that these rates were too
high to be paid by a small country
newspaper—or by reporter Branscome,
who must live off a stipend from the
Southern Regional Council, a not-for
profit, do-goodish organization. Nor is
there any way around the charge. Evans
says that it is quite impossible to allow
Branscome in the files to do his own
research work. And they wonder why some
journalists write lies.
It wasn't lies but the truth that got the
TV A to lower the Freedom of Information
Act on Branscome. He had been writing
about Aubrey Wagner, the Authoritiy's
chairman, fighting for a continuation of
strip-mining and a weakening of the Mine
Health and Safety Act. A source inside the
TVA told Branscome of a plan to strip-mine
the Red Bird coal tract in the Daniel Boone
National Forest, a project that would have
the spin-off advantage of affording tourists a
nice, deep convenient fiat place to set their
air-conditioned campers and trailers.
Next came the case of Hawk Littlejohn, a
Cherokee Indian whose actions have been
less than supportive of the TVA's Tellico
Dam project, waters of which will cover the
remains of Enchota, the capital city of
Littlejohn's ancestors. Branscone's jour
nalistic archeology has brought to light the
fact that the Authority's police force is
keeping some kind of a file on Hawk Lit
tlejohn, and that this file contains material
of a private nature that has no business in a
government document.
The TVA is positive in its assertion that it
doesn't keep dossiers on its critics. Public
Information Officer Evans says that the
data collected on Littlejohn was only for the
purpose of being able to refute him in
public debate. In another period such an
unqualified statement by an official
spokesman might have been accepted, but
not these days.
The TVA's case isn't helped by the fact
that its board hasn't held an open meeting
in 41 years. "The board makes its own rules
as to its conduct," syas Evans, who adds
that, although there has been some in
formal discussion of going public, he
doesn't think it's very likely.
Even though the President appoints the
three man board, this is one you can't
blame on Nixon. The board was running
what has become the largest power
company in America on this kind of pri
ivate, no-peek a-boo basis back in the days
when the President was gaining his im
perfect knowledge of our Constitution in
the Duke Law School.
No, the design of the TVA was set during
the New Deal. Then it represented the
government's going to the people in the
best way the 1930s could conceive.
Whether it has grown too big or too old, its
governance is vulnerable to the most
serious criticisms in the 1970s —yet it
remains the organizational model for such
failures as the new, not reformed Post
Office, as well as other still-unlegislated
proposals of large consequence in fields
like energy and transportation.