University of Massachusetts Amherst - Index Yearbook (Amherst, MA)

Page 33 text:

Peeking at Peking Pays Off After 30 years of trying to isolate the People ' s Republic of China, the United States recognized that na- tion of one-quarter of the world ' s people by breaking its ties with the Nationalist Chinese regime on Taiwan and embracing mainland China as a diplomatic partner in a changing world. The accomodation with the PRC came only a few days before Christ- mas 1978 with the recognition of China by the US at the price of cut- ting formal ties with the Nationalist Chinese on Taiwan by abrogating its 24-year-old defense treaty. Even though the recognition of China had been inevitable since Richard M. Nixon opened the door in 1972, the suddenness of the pre- Christmas development caught the world by surprise. The bitterness of the island Chinese was expressed by Tsai Wei-ping of Taiwan ' s Institute of International Relations: During his campaign, Carter criticised Kis- singer for his secret diplomacy. How different is this - notifying our Presi- dent (Chiang) eight hours before the speech (by Carter announcing the ' normalization ' of relations between Red China and the US)? Another official told Newsweek ' s Andrew Nagorski that We don ' t un- derstand you Americans. It seems that if you can kill Americans - like the Japanese, the Germans and the Chinese did - then you can be their friend. At home, Sen. Barry Goldwater accused Carter of committing a cowardly act that stabs in the back the nation of Taiwan. But most observers conceded that in switching US recognition from Taipei to Peking, Carter was simply facing the reality that the is- land republic would never rule the mainland. And they consoled the world with the statement that the Red Chinese had agreed that Wash- ington would not have to abrogate its defense treaty with the island Chinese for a year after normaliza- tion. This last had been the prime stum- bling block to US recognition of Chi- na. The suddenness of the earth-shat- tering development was explained by the Monday-morning quarter- backs as The mid-term elections were over. Congress was in recess, and Carter was obviously presented with an offer he couldn ' t refuse. A China-watcher said that The Chinese knew that an agreement be- tween us and the Soviet Union was on the way, and they were faced with a choice of making a move now or sitting on the sidelines. The same was true with us; we didn ' t want to be moving more swiftly with Russia (on SALT) than with China. The accomodation which the two countries reached provided for co- operation in such fields as agricul- ture, space, energy, medicine and scholarly exchanges. Plans included negotiations to open US consulates in Canton and Shanghai, San Francisco and one other American city. With a cultural agreement already in the works, trade possibilities opened with a plan to sell Peking a communica- tions satellite to be launched by NASA from the US, complete with ground stations. And while the politicians and ideal- ists were shouting their reactions to the surprise international political coup of the year, American busi- nessmen were quietly filling their display cases and buying airline tick- ets for Peking. Before the end of the year, Coca- Cola was flying the red and yellow flag of the People ' s Republic of Chi- na atop its Atlanta headquarters building while Board Chairman J. Paul Austin told a press conference that Coke was going to China. The timing of the China deal and the normalization deal was coinci- dental, Austin said. Coke officials had been negotiating for ten years for the exclusive rights to the cola market in China. It seemed only fair - after all, on the heels of detente with the Soviet Union, Pepsi Cola had already man- aged an exclusive distribution deal there in 1974. People who drink soft speak soft- ly? Dario Politella Commonwealth vs. Chad ' s Cancer A case of cancer that involves a two-year-old boy, his 24-year-old mom and 300 years of Common- wealth law is still unresolved, but still making periodical headlines. It began in early 1978, when Mass. General physicians discovered that their oral chemotherapy treatments had been stopped by Chad Green ' s parentis. The hospital sued to win state custody of the lad for the limited purpose of receiving chemo- therapy. The Greens won in the lower courts, but in August 1978 the State Supreme Court ruled in the hospital ' s favor. Even as the Greens headed for the Federal courts with a suit based on their belief that their constitutional rights as parents were being violated, the Greens fled to Mexico to a laetrile clinic in Tijuana, rather than obey a court order to stop giving the unproven drug and vitamins to their lukemia-stricken son. By early February 1979, a Plym- outh, Mass., judge ordered their ar- rest for flouting the dignity of the court. The warrants were issued to force the Greens to return to court and show cause why they should not be found in criminal contempt. He also ordered warrants issued so he could sentence them for civil contempt. Meanwhile, the Greens reported from Mexico that their son was flourishing under the alternative treatment of vegetables, laetrile, rest and prayer. The Massachusetts court had ori- ginally ordered the laetrile doses stopped because Chad was being poisoned by cyanide, one ingredi- ent of the controversial substance. At press time, the Mexican stan- doff persists; the warrants are in force, the Greens remain south of the border, where they can ' t be served, and Chad is receiving illegal treatment that his parents insist is keeping him alive. His mother says, I ' m directly in- volved in a love situation. Dario Politella 29

Page 32 text:

Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin embrace as President Carter applauds during a White House announcement that the two Middle East nations had agreed on the Camp David agreement. (UPI) Begin and Sadat toast each other at a state banquet Sadat held for Begin during a two-day visit to Egypt. (AP) (continued from page 27) Sinai; have a joint meeting between Israel, Egypt and Jordan to deter- mine the future of the West Bank and Gaza Strip self-rule with the eventual withdrawl of Israeli armed forces after five years and other stipulations concerning Egypt and Is- rael. Arab reaction in Syria, Libya, Alge- ria, South Yemen and from the Pal- estinian Liberation Organization strongly denounced the agreements calling them a stab in the heart of the Arab nation and a flagrant devi- ation from the common Arab strate- gy, a contradiction of Arab summit resolutions and a denial of Palestin- ian rights. Jordan expressed con- cern saying any peace which disre- gards the Palestinians would be false . . . with upheavals in the Arab world. At the time of the Camp David signing, Israel had refused any deal- ings with the PLO because Israel felt that the organization was a terrorist group not representative of the Pal- estinian people. This conflict of interest was a de- terrent along with the question of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, and on the fate of Jerusalem. Only three days after the framework was signed. Begin answered that he never promised Israeli withdrawal from existing West Bank settlements when the U.S. tried to pin him down to the language written in the text of the agreements. The stage was again set for dis- agreement, this time with linguistics as a barrier. The three month period within which a formal peace agreement was to be signed, passed. Israel ' s stance on the West Bank settle- ments disheartened Carter and those who thought peace was so near. On several occasions the talks were running smoothly, according to official comment, then were ab- ruptly dismantled with each side proclaiming fundamental differ- ences. While this jockeying was taking place, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Begin and Sadat in Octo- ber. While domestic problems mount- ed with the montly inflation figures, gas increases and a rapidly declining popularity, Carter invited Begin to join him and Prime Minister Mustafa Khalil of Egypt to new negotiations in February 1979. Begin rebuffed the offer for new negotiations but did say that he would talk with Carter. At the meeting, Carter advanced new proposals in a desperate effort to salvage some type of accord be- tween Egypt and Israel. Begin re- mained open, saying negotiations needed a revision and I don ' t see any tragedy in it . . . ultimately there would be peace in the Mideast. That peace was finally reached on Monday March 26, 1979 after a bold decision by Carter to visit the Mid- east earlier in the month. The trip was conceived after the Israeli cabi- net approved suggestions Carter made to Begin while he was in Wash- ington. White House sources said that the president ' s trip was open- ended so that the prospects for peace do not dim and perhaps van- ish. One diplomatic source summed up the trip as this last ar- row in the president ' s quiver. He better not miss. Carter shuttled between Israel and Egypt and persuaded Sadat and Begin for a formal signing with the approval of their countries ' legisla- tive bodies. The major elements in- clude: — a surrender of the entire Sinai desert by Israel to Egypt, including settlements. — withdrawal of all military forces and air bases from the Sinai within three years and abandonment of El Arish, the largest Arab city on the Sinai within three months. — establishment of the pre-1948 boundary lines with the fate of Gaza to be determined in future negotia- tions. — normalized relations including economic and cultural, with free- dom of movement, an end to hostile propaganda and the building of nor- mal postal, telephone and highway communications. — exchange of ambassadors. — agreements to set goals for the completion of negotiations concern- ing the West Bank and Gaza Strip elections. — agreement of Egypt to sell Israel oil on non-discriminatory commer- cial terms. — a 15-year extension on guaran- teed Israeli oil supplies to the U.S. — establishment of negotiations for the fate of the West Bank and Gaza . although Israeli officials have indi- cated they would continue building of settlements. The important Palestinian ques- tion remains unresolved at this junc- ture. Begin is still holding the line, refusing to accept a Palestinian state on Israel ' s border. And the U.S. also does not recognize the PLO as representatives of the Pales- tinians until the PLO recognizes Isra- el ' s right to exist and accepts the United Nations Resolution declaring that right. Further negotiations on this sensitive issue are expected to follow the Camp David framework. The first visible sign of harmony has been recorded through the ef- forts of three nations. It is now the option of Mideast negotiators and leaders to implement that printed document that calls for peace. Art Simas

Page 34 text:

Tlie Harrisburg Syndrome Before March 29, 1979 the opin- ion of the average non-technically oriented person in the U.S. concern- ing controversies of the Atomic Age was seldom heard or recog- nized by official sources. Debate pri- or to that date usually hinged on the us vs. them concept of nuclear weapons proliferation. Nuclear pow- er plant construction — although perceived as a very real threat if one was proposed in your backyard — for the most part, did not evoke a resounding emotional response, pro or con. Proponents from both sides had been existent since Hiroshima, but the understanding of operations, positive and negative side effects of radiation and subsequent conse- quences were known only to a hand- ful of scientists and other techni- cians. Other relative social, political and economic events determined the attention of the average citizen. But national attention shifted to the Three Mile Island nuclear facility in Middletown, Pa. on March 29 and weeks beyond, in what, for most Americans, was an abrupt, personal re-evaluation of U.S. committment to future nuclear power generation. The facility at Three Mile Island included an 880 megawatt, highly pressurized water reactor, a com- plex and delicately balanced mecha- nism. Its basic function was to cre- ate a fission reaction with a neutron from a source, usually uranium, to collide with other fissionable nuclei, thereby producing a self-sustaining chain reaction. The heat generated from this process was extracted by water 600° F and under pressure of 2250 pounds per square inch to pro- duce steam in a heat transfer sys- tem which drove the turbine to gen- erate electricity. The fuel elements were compressed cylindrical pellets of uranium oxide, 3 4 of an inch long and 3 8 inch in diameter load- ed into 12-foot long tubers of a zir- conium alloy called cladding. Condensed cooling water pumped back through a primary loop to and around the reactor core served as a modertor of neutron speed and as a coolant. The chain reaction was controlled by lowering control rods made of bo- ron, which absorbed the neutrons, into the reactor core. This delayed the fissioning process. Although this is a simplistic view, and so far does not take into ac- count the radiation emission factor, the technology involved is intricate. The accident at Three Mile Island before dawn was triggered when a main pump in the water system shut down. That pump was supposed to send water through the cooling sys- tem. This stoppage in the flow sys- tem between the reactor and tur- bine caused heat and pressure to increase. The cooling control rods were lowered by the emergency sys- tem, halting the heat generated from fissioning. Also, back-up auxil- liary pumps were activated by com- puters to keep the water flowing. Operators at the plant thought ev- erything was under control, but in- vestigators from the Nuclear Regu- latory Commission found the valves to the back-up pumps were closed prematurely; no water was cooling the reactor, as presumed — days later. Because the valves were closed, water condensed from steam spilled into a pressurized tank in the bot- tom of the building. According to re- ports compiled by the Los Angeles Times, the operators were given erroneous information concerning the water level in the pressurizer ; at the same time the tops of the fuel rods were exposed and over-heated and their radioactive components contaminated the cool- ing water. John G. Herbein, vice president of operations of the Metropolitan Edi- son Company, which operated the plant, said that before the day end- ed, nearly 100,000 gallons of water had spilled onto the cellar floor be- neath the reactor. As the water level rose, an auto- matic sump pump was activated by computer, transfering water to an adjacent building, flooding it. There a filtered ventilating system lifted low-level radiation into the atmo- sphere. Operators were not aware that this was happening. To relieve mounting pressure in the containment building, steam was purposely released into the at- mosphere, spewing out more radi- ation. Residents of the area were not in- formed until hours after the initial accident, at about 4 a.m. Middle- town Mayor Robert Reid, whose bur- ough of 11,000 persons is three miles away from the plant, said he was alerted at 7:37 a.m. by civil de- fense authorities, who confirmed there had been an accident at the plant but that things were under control. However, Reid said, it was three and a half hours before I could get a phone call through to Met Ed to find out if we had a dangerous situation. Reports of radiation exposure re- ceived by four employees were veri- fied by power company officials. Ac- cording to Herbein, three of the workers underwent an exposure of three to three and a half rems of gamma ray radiation, and a fourth received about four rems. A rem is a dose of radiation mea- sured in people. Government safety regulations stipulate an annual dos- age of not more than five rems and only three rems in any three month period. The dosage the men re- ceived was approximately equal to 50-66 chest X-rays absorbed at one time. A conflicting report from Three Mile Island officials said as many as eight workers at the plant may have experienced exposures from 0.5 to 1.0 rems. Reports on March 30 in the Bos- ton Globe and the New York Times quoted Senator Gary Hart (D-Colo.), Chairman of the Senate Public Works Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation, who said the incident was the most serious accident in- voving nuclear power generation in the U.S. Henry Kendal, a physics professor at M.I.T. and director of the Union of Concerned Scientists concurred with Hart. This is clearly the worst accident in nuclear power. But three radiation specialists said that fears about the escape of radi- ation were exaggerated. Professor Richard Wilson of Harvard said it ' s unlikely to cause even one cancer over anybody ' s lifetime in that whole area. His view was support- ed by Dr. Steven Gertz of Philadel- phia and Dr. David Rose of M.I.T. Just when plant officials thought the danger had subsided, the forma- tion of a hydrogen bubble formed when coolant water came in direct contact with damaged and over- 30