|
Viewpoint
: Security or Suicide? Contradictions abound
in new Bush doctrine.
Viewpoint
: Happy 20th, Mom! Sorry you and your domestic
partner have no rights.
Letters:
EW readers sound off.
Security
or Suicide?
Contradictions
abound in new Bush doctrine.
The core of Bush's security strategy, as outlined
in "The National Security Strategy of the United States," is to
remain the dominant power on the face of the Earth forever, and to
do so by striking down any nation that would attempt to catch up.
The Bush administration claims for the U.S. an exclusive
right to pre-emptively strike other nations whenever it feels threatened,
to do so without providing conclusive evidence of imminent threat,
and to do so regardless of what the international community may have
to say about it.
But isn't a domineering foreign policy a large part
of what led terrorists to strike at American symbols of economic and
military dominance? Doesn't military domination, and an enormous gulf
between rich and poor, fuel feelings of injustice and a desire for
revenge?
The Bush administration claims, so far without
providing evidence, that Iraq is a threat because it has weapons of
mass destruction and is attempting to acquire the materials needed
to construct a nuclear weapon.
Yet Bush himself has authorized a massive increase
in funding for "biodefense research." The problem is: In order to
create a working vaccine, one must first become familiar with the
pathogen and how it may be weaponized. Defensive research thus implies
offensive research. Part of the money will go to the construction
of new biosafety level-4 labs, which study pathogens for which there
are no known treatments or cures. According to Eileen Choffnes in
the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, this threatens to kick
off a bioweapons arms race. Choffnes proposes that in order to avoid
an arms race, such research should be the responsibility of an international
body.
In the current Nuclear Posture Review, the
Bush administration stated their intention of developing new nukes
and potentially using them in a first strike. This even though the
U.S., as a signatory nation to the Nonproliferation Treaty, has agreed
to eliminate our nuclear arsenal.
The Bush administration also portrays Saddam Hussein
as a threat because he has violated U.N. security resolutions. Yet
Bush has himself consistently shown little respect for international
conferences and agreements. He recently stated that if the U.N. fails
to support him on the Iraq issue, he will consider the U.N. "irrelevant."
The Bush administration would itself be in violation
of international law, specifically articles 41 and 42 of the U.N.
Charter, if it were to attack Iraq without specific authorization
by the U.N. Security Council. The only other scenario in which a U.S.
attack on Iraq would be legal would be if it were self-defense in
response to an armed attack by Iraq.
How can we make sense of what appears to be the behavior
of a power-mad dictator? Bush's behavior is consistent with the "realist"
school of international relations. Self-proclaimed realists maintain
that, in the absence of enforceable international law, nations are
inevitably engaged in a dominance struggle.
John Mearsheimer, in his book The Tragedy of Great
Power Politics, acknowledges that this situation is tragic. But
he sees no viable alternative. If all states are peaceful except one,
and that one is ambitious for power and conquest, then all other nations
must build up their militaries in order to ensure their survival.
Albert Einstein similarly maintained that as long
as countries consider war a possibility, they will be forced to train
and indoctrinate their citizens, creating a readiness to kill.
Einstein's solution was clear: "Institutions must
be established which will guarantee that any disputes which may arise
between individual nations will be solved on a basis of law and under
international jurisdiction. A supranational organization must make
it impossible for any country to wage war by being able to employ
military forces which that nation alone controls."
The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 21st
Century, developed in 1999 at the Hague Peace Conference, favors the
development of regional and global defense organizations that would
eventually replace national militaries.
There are serious problems in the world: poverty,
famine, terrorism, war, environmental degradation. Ultimately, the
nations of the world will not succeed in working together to overcome
such problems until we as individuals create a peace culture.
When in our daily lives enough of us learn to listen,
to accept others, to work together to ensure that each person's needs
and interests are met, and to resolve our conflicts peacefully, we
will intuitively sense that it is possible for nations to do the same.
We will outgrow famine and war and open up the creative potential
of humanity.
David
Duemler is a Eugene resident and secretary of Eugene PeaceWorks.
Back to Top
Happy
20th, Mom!
Sorry
you and your domestic partner have no rights.
I belong to a list serve for adult children of
gay and lesbian parents, humorously named Queerspawn. The week
The New York Times began running same-sex commitment notices
along with their wedding announcements, the members of Queerspawn
were abuzz. "Marriage is archaic!" one man declared. "I wouldn't wish
it on my dads!" "Why would my mothers want to lump themselves with
those narrow-minded yuppies in the society pages?" another man wrote.
Several of us had a different point of view.
"It's about time!" one woman exclaimed, echoing my
own feelings. When I was 9 years old, my mother came out as a lesbian.
My father sued her for child custody. During the lawsuit, he had an
affair with his lawyer's wife, fired the man and married the woman.
The judge awarded Dad custody of me and my younger siblings because
he apparently demonstrated "a more stable, healthy relationship" than
my mother and her girlfriend. A year later, my father cheated on his
new wife. He continued to do so for years.
Meanwhile, my mother and her partner have just
celebrated their 20th anniversary very, very quietly. They are not
out. They would rather die than see their names linked in a commitment
announcement in their conservative town newspaper. The idea is terrifying
to both of them.
Still, I believe they should have that option.
On Monday, Oct. 14, the Eugene City Council will hear
arguments for and against the Domestic Partner Ordinance, an amendment
to the Human Rights Code would allow non-married couples to register
as domestic partners. The ordinance does not grant marriage rights.
Only the state can legalize this. Neither does the ordinance grant
health benefits to people involved in long-term relationships. This
is determined by individual businesses. What same-sex couples will
gain is some legal clout — clout that would have helped my mother
when she lost her three children in 1979. The ordinance would allow
gay and lesbian couples (and their kids, if they have them) to prove
that they are a family. This could have come in mighty handy in Southern
California when my sister and I begged our mother to go to court a
second time so that we could live with her. (She went and was again
refused custody.)
One might think that someone who watched her
father have affairs through most of her adolescence would be anti-marriage.
But I am far from it. Although marriage had a historically repressive
and patriarchal beginning, these days it gives all couples a chance
to rejoice in their union. It allows for a celebration, a moment in
which to say, "Look! We're a couple in our eyes and in the eyes of
the law!" Many children of gays and lesbians would love to see their
parents recognized as the loving and committed partners they are.
In the U.S., marriage is both an emotionally and legally important
option. The domestic partner ordinance moves one step closer to making
that option available to all couples whether they choose, as in the
case of my mother and her partner, to ignore it or not.
These days, dozens of cities around the nation offer
domestic partner registries. Even St. Louis, Mo., which isn't particularly
known for its liberal views, acknowledges same-sex couples. Eugene
is far behind the times.
I moved here because Eugene seemed to me a place
where women could hold hands with women, men could embrace men and
no one would give it a second thought. I was shocked to find out last
month that the city has no domestic partner registry. Eugene opens
its arms to so many different types of people. It's a model of tolerance
in other parts of the country, but we need to live up to our reputation
for accepting diversity.
It's time for our city to recognize the loving relationships
between same-sex partners, not just with a gay-friendly bookstore
and an annual Pride celebration, but with the same legal rights enjoyed
by heterosexual couples. As I wrote to the members of Queerspawn last
week, "Someday, my mom and her partner might move up here. It sure
would be nice if Eugene recognized them as a couple."
Melissa
Hart of Eugene is the author of the memoir Long Way Home: A daughter's
journey back to her lesbian mother (Windstorm Creative, 2000). Her website
is www.geocities.com/lissahart
Back to Top
A
MOTHER'S LOVE
In my preschooler's lifetime,
we've bombed Kosovo, pounded Afghanistan and now we're closing in
on Iraq. Despite our military's control of the media in these wars,
the bombings are not video games as portrayed on TV. People like you
and me are maimed and shredded, their flesh burned by our weapons
of mass destruction. Cities and towns are destroyed and left with
no clean water, medicine or food, wrecked bridges and roads, and no
safe haven. Families are literally ripped apart or forced into miserable
refugee camps with no way to make a living.
A ground war will, as always, bring rapes of mothers,
wives and daughters by soldiers, ours included. How on earth could
we support something so horrible (and spend billions and billions
doing it), and at the same time idly witness the disintegration of
our economy, schools, healthcare system, indeed our whole society.
It's not the world I want to leave for my daughter. I love her so
much, like every mother loves her child.
Bonnie Souza
Springfield
TANGLED
WEP
EW's coverage (9/19) of the
Crandall/Arambula conceptual sketch for west Eugene and Mark Robinowitz'
Viewpoint (9/26) point out the stark choices forkroading southern
Willamette Valley quality of life.
There are feasible alternatives to the proposed West
Eugene Parkway (WEP). The magic in the Crandall/Arambula report is
that our community has been given a framework for which we will forge
an alternative that supports our values for community livability.
It is not too late to craft a community infrastructure different from
the failed approaches of Los Angeles, Houston and Atlanta.
Some elements of Crandall/Arambula will help us move
toward greater community livability. We need better integrated and
improved land use planning. A dedicated transit route in west Eugene,
along with transit-oriented development will make neighborhoods more
walkable and livable, and create more transportation options. These
are critical components of slowing the expensive, reckless sprawl
sucking the life out of existing neighborhoods and our downtown core.
The dusty old WEP Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
is a dinosaur of the '50s and '60s, when planners believed building
more bad roads was the answer to roads that weren't working.
ODOT needs to do a new EIS that reflects modern knowledge
and quality-of-life values. The new EIS needs to define a purpose
and need that will embrace the full range of feasible and prudent
alternatives to a WEP white elephant; a WEP scheme that won't work,
paves over green space and bankrupts taxpaying, traditional neighborhoods.
Rob Handy
Eugene
REAL
TREASURE
Thanks for the feature on Alan Siporin
(9/26). When somebody writes the book about Eugene between the early
1970s and the present, Alan will stand out as one of the community's
real treasures.
Jeff Stier
Silver Spring, MD
NO
JOKE
As someone of Native American and
Celtic descent, I find it very disturbing that there are people in
this community who say they are not racist because they have friends
from other cultures, friends with skin color different than their
own. Many people with bigoted points of view often use this as a way
to excuse racist comments and jokes they make. "Oh, well it's just
a joke. I didn't mean anything by it. See, I have friends of that
race/culture that I made the joke about. They don't mind. I've heard
them say the same things about themselves."
This is how hate is perpetuated, how it hides in society
and becomes slowly acceptable. Racism has more forms than just openly
racist views and violent actions.
As a community we need to be aware and not perpetuate
stereotypes in any form, or tolerate jokes or comments that mock or
poke fun at any race, culture, religion, sexual preference, origin,
or way of life. When we tolerate these thing we accept them and teach
our children to accept them. It is time to break the cycle.
Sonya Marie Black
Springfield
WHY
THE RIOT?
What a surprise, the off-UO campus
riot last week! What caused the riot in their neighborhood to burn
up and break down things? How can a big party escalate into street
riot? What rage, hate, revenge or pain exploded?
It's like Pink Floyd's The Wall, "We don't
need no education," rioting at school? Did they need a reason to vent
anger? Causes may be: hip, killer computer games, Bush war-threats,
normal competing to win, hateful rap music, triggering repressed and
forgotten child abuse? Maybe fear of cops and booze-triggered release
of inner conflicts raging at others' property and authority? It reminds
us of shocking school murders, where deep emotional causes are ignored!
Just blaming them as "stupid rich or poor frustrated spoiled brat
students" blames the victims of ageism, abuse, normal neglect
and fears of nature, rejection and poverty!
Will we research and learn real deep causes of rebellion
and rioting? Do we care what hidden emotions are exploding? It's easy
to complain of riots costs, crime and anarchists! But threats to punish
rioters don't understand emotional causes and positive solutions.
Rioters are hyper-anxious, mad and don't feel empathy, connectedness
and responsibility to family, neighborhood and laws from elders. Most
transient students have little trust, respect and shared power in
their community. Will the officials use the riot to justify more rules
and cops to prevent/stop riots, costing taxpayers more, like the "war
on terrorism"? Rioters feel powerless there, like a child's tantrum,
having few natural free choices to create, control and play now in
their community!
Micheal Sunanda
Eugene
NO
GHANDI
This letter is meant to address Richard
Alevizos' apparently genuine confusion (9/26) as to why anyone would
"pit themselves" against him in his run for governor. Richard, more
than anything else, your writing communicates an excess of self-importance
that's fantastically unappealing and entirely unproductive. Preaching
about peace, love and understanding while complaining about all of
the people who are too blind and hypocritical to support you will
get you nowhere. You have met the enemy, Richard, and he is you.
By the way, Ghandi didn't write whining, self-congratulatory
articles explaining why people should support him. Obviously you're
no Ghandi. If that fact's not yet clear enough for you, consider that
Ghandi maintained his faith in humanity in the face of the British
colonial system. You, on the other hand, are ready to give up on the
possibility of change simply because your political ambitions have
been disappointed.
Tim Shaw
Eugene
GROWTH
MISCONDUCT
Capitalism is based on the freedom
of individuals to make money in a free market. More people making
money and consuming means more jobs and money for others who can then
consume more. The goal of capitalism is to have more people consuming
more resources. Capitalism seeks endless growth and has no self-regulation
to stop its own growth.
Can we have more people consuming more resources forever?
If not, what will stop our growth-based economy? If we don't stop
our growth, what will happen when we outgrow the resources available
to us on Earth? What would be indicators that we are growing too big
for our own good? Some people believe technology will fix whatever
problems occur from our endless growth. Technology has allowed the
human population to soar and for people to live longer. It has given
a small percentage of us comforts and privileges unimaginable for
most of human history. But because of technology, we cut trees faster
than they grow, catch fish more rapidly than they can reproduce, drain
rivers dry, burn fossil fuel to the point of having a destructive
effect on the earth's atmosphere, produce massive pollution and waste,
and cause an enormous spike in the extinction rate of other species.
Technology is both good and bad for us and like capitalism,
it needs limits and common sense to address the problems created by
it. Our personal desires for "more" can cloud our common sense about
acting in the best long-term interests of the human race and other
life on the planet.
Please help stop our ultimately destructive growth
by speaking out against it. The sooner we learn to stop growing, the
better off we'll be!
Patrick Bronson
Eugene
RELOCATE
DEMOCRACY
The president and his cronies are
at it again. Despite the recent defeat of the potentially catastrophic
"logging rider" in the Senate, Bush and his buddies are going to attempt
to expand Categorical Exclusions (CE's) to include timber sales in
the name of "Healthy Forests." CE's are usually reserved for much
smaller projects such as installing toilets at campgrounds and making
extra parking spaces at a viewpoint etc. By defining large timber
sales under the CE label, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management
will be able to "fast-track" logging operations and shut out the public
from land management decisions.
With all the flag waving and claims of being "One
Nation Indivisible," especially by the administration itself, it is
interesting to look at the abolishment of democracy in this particular
instance. Not only are these actions to expand the considerations
for CE's not talked about in mainstream media; but the action itself
is also an insult to the democracy as a whole. By taking the public
out of the decision-making process in our forests, the President is
attempting to sidestep democracy in order to repay the debts he acquired
during his campaign fundraising.
These are our forests. The question is no longer,
"What is a healthy forest?" or, "What is a fire-prone forest?" The
pressing question has become, "Is this what democracy looks like?"
The answer is simple: When the public is excluded from managing their
lands for the sake of private capital gain, and the public does not
receive adequate information from news sources, democracy is missing
and needs to be relocated.
Ray Cole
Eugene
BUCKING
THE TREND
Through substantial funding of conservative
think tanks, extreme conservatives have become experts in manipulating
the election process. They win by setting the agenda, speaking with
one voice through the media and identifying single issues that split
voting blocks. The rush to go to war with Iraq is the latest example
of their strategies.
While corporate scandals and the poor economy were
grabbing the headlines, there was suddenly an urgent need to go to
war with Iraq. Now the Democrats are in a no-win situation: If they
oppose the war, they are labeled unpatriotic and lose swing voters
whom they need to win elections. The swing voters are often susceptible
to flag waving arguments. If these Democrats don't oppose the war,
they lose the support of progressives who strongly oppose the call
to war. In addition, all the other issues — such as cuts to
Medicare, gutting of environmental regulations, and investigations
into Bush and Cheney's use of insider knowledge to make their fortunes
— get pushed off the front pages.
Gore has finally come out to show some leadership
on the Iraq issue, and other Democratic leaders are seeing how he
fares. Talk radio and other media are already organizing to criticize
Gore's efforts. Of course, he should be used to that by now.
If one really wants change, strong support is needed
for those such as Gore and DeFazio, who buck the trend and show leadership.
Another way to encourage change is to give Democrats real control
of the Senate by electing Bill Bradbury.
Frank Vignola
Eugene
STORM
TROOPER
Given that President (appointed,
not elected) Bush was AWOL during Vietnam, a perfect name for his
hissy fit war with Saddam Hussein would be: Deserter Storm.
Douglas Hintz
Eugene
LETTERS POLICY: We welcome letters on all topics
and will print as many as space allows. Please limit length to 250 words,
keep submissions to once a month, and include your address and phone
number. E-mail to editor@eugeneweekly.com,
fax to 484-4044, or mail to 1251 Lincoln, Eugene 97401.
Back to Top
Table
of Contents
| News | Views | Arts & Entertainment
Classifieds | Personals
| EW
Archive
|