OCR Text |
Show Friday May 7. 1965 SIGNPOST Page 9 By Steve Larson The President of the United States took action on a very touchy problem when he sent over three thousand troops into the Republic of Santo Domingo. There is question in the minds of many of our conscientious citizens as to whether we belong there or not. Some feel that it Is an act of agression, others think we are beginning to exert too much in fluence outside of our own bounderies. Whatever stand you choose, there are only four possible motives for our being theie. The first motive is that we are imperialistically agressive. Let us examine that possiblity. While the countries who were occupied by by the communists after the se cond World War aire still under their tight-fisted control the countries under the United States have long since been givn the right to self government. Some of these countries now ex ercise the right to the extent of rising in protest against the U. S. While the Russians were crushing the Hungarians, the Ha- waiians and Alaskans were slow to be granted their continuous petitions for statehood, and the Phillipians are granted self determination. No, our efforts have definately not been to increase the size of our empire, if you insist on caiung it that. The second possible motive is that we are favorable towards the present administration, and are supporting it. This holds the nasty possibility that the people really want a new government. If our motive was to support one side or the other, we would be standing in the way of self determination, .which is in opposition to the basic tenants of our political doctrine. We have not taken either side however, so it is invalid to accuse us of that. Perhaps our motive is to keep communism out of Santo Domingo. This is the third possibility. Since we have not taken sides, we cannot be there for that rea son. If, however, we should find that the rebellion was communist inspired, we would be in legitimate possition to take sides. The Rio pact of the Organization of American States, to which Santo Domingo agreed, provides for outside interferance against communism. If this should be the reason,, we would be justified, even obligated to .intervene. But this is not the case yet. The. fourth possible motive is to protect American life and property there. This has been our motive so far. That our government is justified in protecting Americans should go with out saying. Furthermore, an embassy stands, by governmental grant of the country it stands in, on American soil. It is inviolable, flies the American Flag, and belongs to America. Our government has as much right to protect our embassy as it does to defend Washington D. C. In short, we have a right to be there, we ought to be there, and last but .not least, we are there. L detailing, the custom-like h i COMPARE the fine -a 3 . ' 5) I ' Handsome . . . Rich and Right in Style, Superbly comfortable! Drop by Feel the difference. Exclusively with ... Glen Robins, the Cobbler By Kay London POINT OF VIEW: As American college students it appears to me that we have a responsibility to be informed on the world around us. As future parents, citizens and leaders, I propose to you that we have a responsibility to prepare ourselves so that we may make this a better world for future generations than the world in which we were born. While some may think, this trite, this is our obligation, it is part of our social contract. It appears to me that every issue has two sides. In order to make a valid decision, we must view the problem' in a proper perspective. While some expect simple, Mack and white answers, they are not always possible. One major problem in trying to oe rational and objective is that some educated idiots insist on labeling and name calling as a means of answering valid arguments. I hope that during the period we discuss the vital issues of our time, we can be as objective as possible. This column is not a sounding board for my personal ideas as much as it is an expression in the belief that we must view both sides of the question in order to make valid decisions. QUESTION: In analizing problems in international relations points. 1. The United States has we must onsider two basic a declared foreign policy of containment. 2. If we expect to live in the community of nations, we have to fulfill certain obligations in respect to International law, and our duly signed treaties. I propose to you that at the present time we are neglecting our responsibilities in both basic points. Our course of action in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic is inconsistent with International Law and our avouded Foreign Policy. At the present time this small Latin American country is in the midst of a civil war. The rebels claim that they are working for "the return of exiled former president Juan D. Bosch and the 1963 constitutional government." The rebels claim that their numbers are 18,000 strong, including armed civilians, soldiers and women according to an Associated Press report. During the midst of this internal dispute, the United States sent troops to "protect American lives and property." I propose to you that this claim is questionable. In the first place why don't we just evaculate all of the foreign nationals out of the Republic that wanted to leave At the time this article was written, we had 14,000 American Marines and soldiers to evacuate only 8,000 non Dominican people. Simple mathematics should make us reconsider our pretense of protection.A second major point is that fact that we have stated that "the U. S. does not support any man or group in the country." But we claimed that the revolution had been over run by communists and that "we must help prevent another Communist state in the hemishpere." This seems to me that we are either inconsi-staJit or awfully confused. Since we have no proof that there has been foreign, external control of the revolutionaries, we have no real excuse to send troops into this small country. Without direct foreign intervention from a non western hemisphere, we can not claim that we are only using the Monroe Doctrine. This action appears to be inconsistent with our present foreign policy. There can be no question that we as a NON-Donimican nation interveined into an internal dispute.According to the Treaties that we have signed, we will not tolerate foreign intervention in internal affairs. We felt this point so strongly that, we instigated the Conally Reservation to insure this principle. But we have actually violated this same principle. I am against totalitarian governments as much as any one else, but I think that our means are as important as our ends. We talk about how horrible it was fehat the Soviet Union sent troops into Hungary in 1956 to "insure peace and security" but haven't we just done the same thing? . POST SCRIPT: As Americans we have to decide what our foreign policy should entail. In Latin American we already have blundered in Cuba, the Dominican Republic and in other countries-will Santo Domingo turn into another Havarana I hope not. jrmVWWHL '-LIU.JL WWWIKL I JlJ I Mill llll " '1' I III I " I " I II I II I l"l I I l' I ll DatPieflltltoX CLOTHIER c A IS t.l 11 ri Tl 1 'I " ' 1 ' 111 11 " 1 "irr ct.atul the loafing 1$ crisp Seersucker buff? This year, you have a happy problem how to choose from our variety of seersucker jackets. Not just stripes, but plaids ond patterns, too. Not just blue or grey, but a big, colorful pallette of other shades. Come In for an introduction to crisp Sum rner loafing now! 25. The Red" Carpet Shop BUEHLER -BIIKM SSQO WASHINGTON BLVR ' PHONE 3M-C508 YL ffJ5a.jagP rsjia jB&s tTgj .1 , ft'', .( ? t f i m i h ) I .JA f J' fe I f I |