Opinion
Lawrence Journal-World l LJWorld.com l Tuesday, September 9, 2014
EDITORIALS
Challenging issue Educating students and working to change attitudes are an important part of the effort to curb sexual assault on campus.
K
ansas University is by no means the only U.S. university struggling with the problem of sexual assault among its students. However, recent attention focused on a KU case is drawing the kind of attention that no university wants. Critics are claiming that KU officials aren’t doing enough to punish a student who was accused of raping a fellow student in October 2013. Their concerns are based on recent news reports about the case that present mostly one side of the story. Confidentiality laws prevent KU officials from disclosing information about the case, but it seems safe to say that KU officials may have some additional information that could temper the criticism they currently are receiving. Federal law requires universities to investigate reports of sexual assault. Like all state universities in Kansas, KU has procedures in place to conduct those investigations and take action based on its findings. KU, Kansas State University and Washburn University are among 76 schools nationwide whose policies for handling sexual assault reports are being investigated by the federal government. The Kansas Board of Regents also has indicated it wants to review policies at its state universities to see how they are working. A federal and state review of the university policies is fine. Everyone should be on the same page when it comes to dealing with what has become an alltoo-common problem on university campuses. However, it’s important to realize the challenges universities face when they are placed in a quasi-judicial role of investigating, judging and doling out punishment for alleged sexual assaults. Many, if not most, of these reports are never the subject of legal prosecution, but universities are expected to determine the truth of the situations and issue appropriate punishments. They are expected to sort through accounts that often are clouded by alcohol consumption and arrive at judgements that protect the rights of both the accuser and the accused. It’s not an easy task. Nonetheless, no school can afford to be viewed as being unconcerned about sexual assault or too lenient in dealing with those who commit it. KU officials point out that students have indeed been suspended or expelled for sexual assault, but, as Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little said last week, it’s neither desirable nor possible for KU officials to monitor the activity in every student room or party. GrayLittle’s request that KU students “look out for each other and be willing to take action when you know something is wrong” is a practical approach that could lessen the number of sexual assault cases the university is called upon to investigate. As noted at the outset, KU isn’t the only university dealing with this issue. This is, in fact, a broad societal issue that impacts young people both on and off of university campuses. Likewise, the need to change attitudes and educate young people about alcohol use and what constitutes consent in a sexual situation is a responsibility not only of universities but also of family members and peers. Universities have an important role to play but a broader societal change also is needed. LAWRENCE
Journal-World
®
Established 1891
W.C. Simons (1871-1952); Publisher, 1891-1944 Dolph Simons Sr. (1904-1989) Publisher, 1944-1962; Editor, 1950-1979
Dolph C. Simons Jr., Editor Julie Wright, Managing Editor Ed Ciambrone, Production Manager
Mike Countryman, Director of Circulation
Ann Gardner, Editorial Page Editor
THE WORLD COMPANY
Dolph C. Simons Jr., Chairman Dolph C. Simons III, Dan C. Simons, President, President, Newspapers Division
Digital Division
Suzanne Schlicht, Chief Operating Officer Scott Stanford, General Manager
7A
NATO must call invasion what it is In 1949, George Orwell published “1984,” his famous portrait of a totalitarian regime whose “Ministry of Truth” spews rank propaganda called “Newspeak” that turns historical facts on their head. Newspeak has been alive and well these past weeks in Moscow, where President Vladimir Putin flatly denied any Russian presence in Ukraine, even as thousands of Russian troops and heavy weapons invaded that country. What’s more disturbing is that NATO leaders meeting in Wales last week to discuss Ukraine refused to denounce Putin’s aggression as an “invasion.” This failure ensured that the Russian leader emerged as the winner at the Wales summit, even though he wasn’t present. And it almost guarantees that the temporary cease-fire reached last week between Kiev and Ukrainian “rebels” won’t last.
Language of war As Orwell knew, language plays a critical role in warfare. Putin’s propaganda machine has been crucial in rallying support for his Ukraine policy at home, as well as in the ethnic Russian provinces of eastern Ukraine. Meanwhile, the West’s reluctance to challenge Putin’s narrative has crippled NATO’s efforts to stop him from dismembering Ukraine. When Russians were captured in Ukraine or sent home in body bags, the Kremlin insisted they had been “volunteers” or crossed the border by accident. Mothers of the dead men were silenced, soldiers’ graves left unmarked, and the few brave Russian journalists who reported the story were physically attacked. The Kremlin blatantly denied what the world could see — the satellite photos and physical sightings of
Trudy Rubin
“
trubin@phillynews.com
A NATO rejection of Putin’s Newspeak would have opened the door to a more forceful commitment to protecting the Balts and the Poles from Russian aggression.” columns of Russians crossing the border. Within Russia, the Kremlin has taken total control of all national television stations from which most Russians get their news. In eastern Ukraine, Putin’s proxies cut the signal to Ukrainian stations, so Russian-speakers’ sole news source is TV propaganda from Moscow. That means a steady diet of made-up stories and falsified video, depicting the Kiev government as Nazi fascists eager to kill Russian-speaking Ukrainians. Such agitprop has whipped up Russian support for Putin at home while terrifying ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine, and enabled Putin to sell the annexation of Crimea as a rescue operation to save ethnic Russians.
Invasion denial But polls show that the Russian public has no appetite for an invasion, so Russian TV steadfastly denies that Russian troops have invaded Ukraine. Meantime, President Barack Obama and other NATO leaders have also refused to call the invasion by its rightful name. Western officials have fulminated against Russian
aggression but — with the notable exception of leaders from the Baltics and Poland — have studiously avoided the I-word. The reason, as Lithuanian Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius told The New York Times, is obvious: “If you call something less than an invasion you can feel that you don’t have to react.” Indeed, at the summit in Wales, it was clear that — when it came to stopping the Russian dismemberment of Ukraine — NATO leaders couldn’t agree on anything harsher than expanding current economic sanctions. They certainly didn’t agree to send desperately needed defensive weapons to Ukraine.
Russian subterfuge Sanctions have had some impact — without them, Putin might have sent tens of thousands of troops into Ukraine, rather than 1,000 to 3,000. But the Russian leader has clearly developed a new form of hybrid warfare: using subterfuge to confuse Western countries. Additional sanctions won’t deter him. The so-called rebellion in eastern Ukraine was stagemanaged by Russian intelligence agents, backed with Kremlin funds and arms, from the start. This was clearly evident when I visited Donetsk in May, and interviewed some “rebel” leaders. When these Russian proxies proved incompetent, and Ukrainian forces were on the brink of defeating the “rebellion,” Putin rushed in just enough Russian military and heavy equipment to push back advancing Ukrainian troops. The Kiev government doesn’t have the resources to withstand a Russian-backed assault, so it may be forced to bow to Putin’s dictates as he tries to re-create a Russian empire. If NATO allows that to happen, Putin will have destroyed the post-World War
II international order in Europe that was based on the premise that no country invaded another. However, if NATO continues to pretend there was no invasion, it can also pretend that nothing has changed. Of course, the Baltic nations and Poland, which are NATO members, are too vulnerable to indulge in such pretenses; they fear they may be Putin’s next victims. That is why they want to call the Russian invasion of Ukraine by its real name.
NATO must confront Putin A NATO rejection of Putin’s Newspeak would have opened the door to a more forceful commitment to protecting the Balts and the Poles from Russian aggression. Such protection would require permanent NATO bases in those countries. Instead, NATO proposed a small rapid-reaction force that will have little effect against Putin’s deceptive warfare. NATO rejected the basing option because of a 1997 agreement with Russia not to put “substantial combat forces” in Central and Eastern Europe. Yet by invading Ukraine (not to mention invading and annexing Crimea), Moscow has openly violated another accord, the 1994 Budapest memorandum, that commits it to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine should also nullify that 1997 accord. Unless Obama and other NATO leaders confront what Putin does, not what he says, he will feel free to practice hybrid warfare elsewhere, secure in the knowledge that he can deny his actions to his own people and to the world. By buying into Kremlin Newspeak, NATO has given Putin carte blanche to continue unsettling Europe — and destroying Ukraine. — Trudy Rubin is a columnist and editorial-board member for the Philadelphia Inquirer.
OLD HOME TOWN
100
PUBLIC FORUM
Police priorities To the editor: Much of my concern about investing our money into a new police headquarters would be alleviated if I was assured that our local police department was an ally in the movement to reverse the disturbing trend of police militarization that we have been seeing among police departments over the last 10 years. Fortunately it seems like the Lawrence Police Department has avoided becoming a part of this trend. But I think the nation in general has become alarmed by what we have seen in Ferguson and elsewhere. I think providing positive leadership in light of this
disturbing trend is more important than ever — most of all from courageous police departments who are willing to publicly say, “This is not the way.” The oath of police is to protect and serve all citizens. It should never treat citizens as enemy combatants. I am hoping our Lawrence police department can be one of these courageous voices. I believe they can. Lawrence has a history of being awesome. The recent interfaith vigil for Michael Brown was a reminder of that. I would like our police to be just as awesome. I would like our police department to publicly state that it will never accept military gear from the Pentagon. I would also like the Lawrence
Police Department’s public support of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, which is a national coalition of law enforcement working to end the disastrous effects of the drug war. If you can do these things, you will have my support. Tim Hjersted, Lawrence
Letters Policy
The Journal-World welcomes letters to the Public Forum. Letters should be 250 words or less, be of public interest and should avoid name-calling and libelous language. The Journal-World reserves the right to edit letters, as long as viewpoints are not altered. By submitting letters, you grant the Journal-World a nonexclusive license to publish, copy and distribute your work, while acknowledging that you are the author of the work. Letters must bear the name, address and telephone number of the writer. Letters may be submitted by mail to Box 888, Lawrence Ks. 66044 or by email to: letters@ljworld.com
From the Lawrence Daily Journal-World for Sept. 9, 1914: years “Rev. H. E. ago Wolfe returned IN 1914 yesterday afternoon from Boulder, Colo., where he has been spending his vacation. Rev. Wolfe heard ‘Billy’ Sunday in Denver and talked with him and his manager about spending a day in Lawrence on their way to Des Moines. The manager gave encouragement that it would be possible for them to stop in Lawrence.... Last Sunday he preached to 27,000 people in Denver and then there was as many as 2,000 turned away.” “‘Nearly all of the houses are taken and the people are still coming to Lawrence,’ this was the statement of one of the real estate men of Lawrence this morning and indications are that there will be no empty houses.” “Mary Crosier Metcalf, the wife of General Wilder S. Metcalf, died at the home here last evening at five o’clock.... In girlhood Mrs. Metcalf was an accomplished musician and sang much in public in her own and joining counties. After her marriage she put to one side her talent for music and devoted all her varied powers to making a home. She had excellent taste and judgment and as a housekeeper she was unexcelled. She delighted in entertaining her own or her husband’s friends. She had a keen sense of humor and had a world of friends who loved and appreciated her. Fatally stricken with paralysis six months ago she has been uniformly pleasant, kindly and cheerful during her long illness.” — Compiled by Sarah St. John
Read more Old Home Town at LJWorld.com/news/lawrence/ history/old_home_town.