editorial
Reagan is effective
in dealing with crisis
The presidential election of 1980 took place while Presi
dent Jimmy Carter was frantically trying to gain the release
of the America hostages held in Iran and
Republican candidate Ronald Reagan was standing in the
sidelines condemning Carter's handling of the situation.
Carter's impotence in relieving the situation and
Reagan's appearance of strength was a strong force in sway
ing the election in Reagan's favor. The election results were
reinforced when the hostages were re'eased the day Reagan
was inaugurated and when a few days later Reagan stated
“Let terrorists be aware that when the rules of international
behavior are violated, our policy will be one of swift and ef
fective retribution.”
Now. in the face of a hostage crisis that bears
resemblance to the situation that took place in Iran and has
left one man dead and forty still in captivity. Reagan appears
to be as helpless as Carter was in relieving the situation.
However, to leave it at that would be to do an injustice to
Reagan.
Following other terrorist attacks, such as the 1983 bom
bing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, the Reagan Ad
ministration delivered some strong statements promising
retribution to those responsible. But. in none of the cases
was retribution delivered.
However, though Reagan told the hijackers to release
the hostages for "their own safety” and threatened to hold
Shiite Moslem leader Nabih Bern responsible for the
hostages’ safety, he has not delivered the same broad threats
of retribution that have followed other attacks. It appears
that he has learned the danger of promising something that
he is unable to or has no intention of delivering.
There are also some important differences between the
Iranian hostage crisis and that of Lebanon. When Americans,
were taken captive from the American embassy in Iran,, we
knew that those responsible were Iranians who supported
the Ayatollah Khomeini. In this case, though we know that
the hijackers are part of the Shiite Moslem group, we cannot
determine the country behind the attack. This, as Reagan
pointed out during a June 18 press conference, makes
retribution difficult.
Further, it is ineffective to threaten people who have
identified themselves as Shiite Moslems, people who have
historically been willing to sacrifice their own lives for their
causes.
Reagan has also avoided the pitfall Carter allowed
himself to fall into during the Iranian crisis. Reagan, by con
tinuing with schedueled appointments and by focussing on ■=
other issues such as his tax plan, has refrained from allow
ing the crisis to engulf his job as president.
Reagan has done a good job of trying to achieve the
delicate balance of protecting the lives of the Americans
now being held hostage and preventing future attacks.
Reagan’s refusal to make concessions to the terrorists will
devalue the use of terrorism as an effective tool for obtaining
demands. At the same time, his placement of priority on the
lives of the hostages and proceeding with negotiations are
sincere efforts to bring the hostages home alive.
And in order to protect other Americans from terrorist
action, Reagan has urged the Department of Transportation
to extend the “armed air marshal program” which involves
the random placement of plain clothed armed air marshals
on airplanes to act as deterrents to hijackers. A spokesman
for the Department of Transportation said that the depart
ment is considering this request and has also proposed a bill
to Congress that would give the secretary of transportation
the authority to immediately stop airline transportation to
any airport found to have deficient security.
In addition, Reagan has also asked U.S. airlines to con
sider discontinuing flights into Athens as well as request
that Americans refrain from using the Athens airport in
order to pressure Greece into revamping the airport’s securi
ty. He also asked Americans not to enter Middle Eastern na
tions that do not "publicly condemn and disassociate itself
from this atrocity and call for the immediate release of our
citizens.” These measures are in addition to the bolstering
of security that has taken place throughout Reagan’s term of
office.
Reagan’s shift of priority onto the safety of American
lives rather than retribution signals a new, more realistic ap
proach to terrorism for the president.
Pne<> 2
( DOZEN SHIITE
GUYS)
JO. -
Opinion may hurt student groups
' The opinion handed down by Attorney.
General Dave Fruhn mayor may hiavd some serious
implications for campus student groups funded
through incidental fees if the Oregon State Hoard
of Higher Education chooses to abide by tt.
The opinion forbids the use of incidental fees
-to fund support of an Oregon ballot measure and.
if this isn’t enough control for the QSBHE. the
opinion would also limit funds for other political
activities to. programs "under the supervision or
control of the board" that the board finds "advan
tageous to the cultural or physical development
of students." Further, it would be necessary for
the board to determine that the activity would
"directly benefit the collective interests of the
students who must pay the fee."
This opinion appears to be a direct effort on
the part of the attorney general at the request of
the Oregon House Republican Leader l.any
.Campbell and Bill Umman, the'vice-chancellor
for Higher Education to tighten the reins on the
activities of certain student groups. It is difficult
to overlook the fact that Campbell is employed by
Pacific Northwest Bell which.was a'major oppo
nent of the ballot measure that established the
Citizens Utility Board. CUB was heavily lobbied
for by the Oregon Student . Public: Interest
Rcaseart.h Group. Also, Lem man makes' it no
secret that he apposes the use of incidental fees to
support the South African divestiture suit.
There is also evidence that some College
Republicans pushed for the opinion as well . Lem
man claims that he asked for the opinion at the re
quest of students, and David Ridenour and Doug
Crown. who are both College Republicans, have. -
l>oen associated with the request for the opinion
The opinion diwtly threatens the ASIJOY
support of the-'divestiture suit'and the very-ev-;
isle me of groups sue h as the Oregon StudentCrb ^
by. the Survival Center and Student Campaignfor.'
Disarmament The other alarming feature U the
’ vague language that specifies the qualifications*
student groups would need in order to usedejnds ;.*•
toadvocate other political issues The opinion .
!fives the OSBHK the broad power to-determine'
or the students what is and w-hal is not "advan
tageous" for them it leaves the temptation to the
OSBHK to support funding issues they agree'with
and to forbid funding issues that they don't’agree
with all too vulnerable. *.••>.•
If the OSBHK takes the opinion to heart, the
only recourse for groups who want to advocate
political issues that have been denied IFC funds ,
for the purpose, is to use revenues other than I PC
money. But for the 72 of the 75 IFC funded groups ■
that receive nearly all of their funding.fipm IKC
this could be a rliffii lut task. ° •
Ideally, perhaps it should be that student foes
are only spent to represent the collective interests
of the students as a whole. However; the OSBHK
with the support of the College Republicans,
whose views do not coincide with the majorityjof
the views of the students on this campus? are-poor •.
candidates to determine this Fortunately, the
OSBHK, which already has the power to veto ter
tain uses of IFC funds and up until now has rarely '
intervened in IFC decisions, can ignoref/the
opinion We suggest that it does. ; t "
Good increases need consistency 1
The allocation of funds totalling about $24.4
million to the University during the 19H5 Oregon
legislative session marks a significant increase
over the last biennium's allocation. The increase
was largely a result of the lobbying efforts of
Eugene Mayor Brian Ohio. Charlene Curry,
governmental relations director, and faculty
members that chose to lobby for salary increases
rather than seek better pay at other institutions.
They deserve many thanks.
University salaries received a 16-17 percent
increase, and $14.4 million was contributed to
the establishment and support of a science
building and various science programs
However, while the endowment did repre
sent a substantial increase, legislators should
realize that this type of funding is needed on a
regular basis. The salary Increase just brings
wages up to par with that of other institutions and
will need to lie kept a top legislative priority if the
University hopes to retain the level and quality of
faculty it enjoys now.
Oregon doily
emerald
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published on Tuesdays
and Thursday during the summer session except during
exam week and vacations by the Oregon Dally Emerald
Publishing Co., at the University of Oregon, Eugene
Oregon, 9/403
The Emerald operates Independently ol the Universi
ty with offices on the third floor of the Erb Memorial
Union and is a member of the Associated Press
The Emerald is private property The unlawful
removal or use of papers Is prosecutable by law
General Staff
Advertising Director
Production Manager
Classified Advertising
Assistant to the Publisher
Susan Thelen
Russell Steele
Vince Adams
Jean Ownbey
Advertising Sales Tim Clevenger, Michael Gray, Nancy
Nielsen, David Wood ^ 1
Production Vince Adams, Kelly Cornyn, Storm! Dykes
Kathy Gallagher, Kelly Neff, Michele Ross, Peg Wnlkai
Karen Stallwood, Colleen Tremaine, Hank Trotter
Editor
Managing Editor, Haws Editor
Editorial Page Editor
Entertainment Editor
Photo Editor
Night Editor
Associate Editors
Administration
Higher Education, Community
Student Activities
Features
Julie Ship pen
Diana Elliott
Michelle Brence
Sheila Landry
Karen StaJlwood
Julie Shipper
Kirsten Bolm
Scott McFetrldge
Julie Freeman
Marty Schwawbauer
Reporters Sean Axmaker. Robert Colllas. Allan La/o,
Linda Hahn
Photographers: Steven Qlbbons. Jim Marks, Ross Marlin,
Hank Trotter
News amt Editorial
Display Advertising and Business
Classified Advertising
Production
Circulation
686-5511
6863712
666 4343
666 4361
666 5511
16