Harvard Law School Makes Online Zero-L Course Free for All U.S. Law Schools Due to Coronavirus
For Kennedy School Fellows, Epstein-Linked Donors Present a Moral Dilemma
Tenants Grapple with High Rents and Local Turnover at Asana-Owned Properties
In April, Theft Surged as Cambridge Residents Stayed at Home
The History of Harvard's Commencement, Explained
To the Editors of The Crimson:
Both of your editorials of March 22 merit a response. Your first editorial claims that there is "no evidence of outside interest" in the recent Katangan invasion of Zaire. But the simple and incontrovertible fact is that Angola is supplying the Katangans with arms. What then is wrong with giving military aid to Zaire? Zaire, while not a perfect democracy, is miles ahead of Angola. Why doesn't The Crimson comment on the 10,000 Cuban troops remaining in Angola? We agree that America should not forget the lessons of Vietnam. But there is a big difference between sending arms and sending troops. Therefore we applaud the recent action of the Carter Administration.
As for the second editorial, your suggestion that America "test the good faith" of the Soviet Union is too ludicrous to comment on. The 40 senators who voted against Paul Warnke were trying to undermine Paul Warnke, not U.S. arms negotiations. According to his past statements, Warnke is a supporter of unilateral disarmament. The Crimson simply confuses the matter by talking about "qualifications." The issue is Warnke's views, not his resume.
Let's be realistic. Everyone favors arms control, including those 40 senators. But meaningful arms control will only come from hard bargaining, because the Soviets--as recent studies indicate--are intent on gaining nuclear superiority. We, like the 40 senators who voted against confirmation, believe that Paul Warnke is not the right person for the demanding job of U.S. chief negotiator at SALT. Edward Mansfield '78 Policy Director, Harvard Republican Club
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.