A Source of Shame - and a Remedy

The Reagan administration continues to be a source of embarrassment, if not shame, to the American people.

After the CIA, following administration orders, supervised the mining of Nicaraguan territorial waters, that nation filed suit against the United States in the World Court at the Hague. It asked for an order to the United States to stop the illegal mining, and the illegal sponsorship of the guerrillas fighting to overthrow the Nicaraguan government. It also sought damages for injuries allegedly inflicted.

The first issue went to the UN, but the United States vetoed any consideration of the dispute. When Nicaragua took the controversy to the World Court Reagan's crew announced its refusal to permit the Court to consider any American actions of the last two years. The Court heard arguments regarding its jurisdiction, and decided by a vote of 15 to 1 that Nicaragua had a right to sue and the the Court had jurisdiction. Only the American judge voted for the Reaganite position. The judges of all the countries allied with us politically voted for Nicaragua.

Why?

Senator Barry Goldwater, a conservative Republican, defined the situation. "This is an act violating international law," he wrote to CIA Director William Casey, "I don't like it one bit, from the President or from you."

America was a prime mover in establishing the World Court, and codifying international law. We used both in suing Iran after that nation had seized the hostages in 1979. The World Court decision at that time marshaled support for pressure on Iran, and eventually secured release of the hostages without loss of life. Now we have the spectacle of a government that denounces terrorism, as Reagan does, refusing to allow a Court of law to pass judgement on its own terrorist acts.

Reagan has put America in the same gang of international outlaws as Khomeini put Iran. Iran did try its case before the Court. Reagan won't even do that. The administration is like the mugger who won't obey a law that prohibits mugging, because such a law limits his freedom of action. Reagan says that submitting to the World Court would limit our freedom of action.

Perhaps none of this is shocking. Perhaps the observers who say - some with satisfaction and others with sorrow - that America now has a society and a government it wants, are right. A government devoid of ethical sensitivity and dedicated to greed, camouflaged as self-interest, the rallying cry of Ayn Rand, the guru of right-wing conservative dogma. Perhaps we are like the street gang, which, with guns and knives, takes freedom to terrorize its community.

We are in the Christmas season. Christians celebrate the coming of God into the world in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah. We find hope in the angelic proclamation, "Glory to God in the highest, Peace among men of goodwill."

The first step toward the peace we want is to get an understanding of what an opponent wants, why he wants it and a knowledge of the experiences that have molded his thinking. Listening to an opponent is a lost art for the ideological fanatics of both the right-wing conservatives and their counterparts in the leftist crowd. Honest peace seekers will take the necessary steps and listen.

A top official of a certain labor union once told me of an experience he had in dealing with a national corporation with about fifty operating units throughout the country. The Chairman of the Board of the Corporation came to him with a problem. The union and management were squabbling in labor disputed to such an extent that, despite negotiations, about three hundred such disputes were going to arbitration each month. Could they cut back on that number? The two men developed a program in which they would go as a team of two to each plant for a series of seminars. The Board Chairman would lead the management team in an in depth study of the working man's point of view and attitudes. At the same time the union leader would conducts an in depth study of management problems and attitudes with the local union officials and stewards.

They took a little over a year to implement the idea. But at the end of that time the number of disputes going to arbitration had been reduced from three hundred to about twenty. The key factor was that each side listened to the other. The union got a superb contract and management got a stable, cooperative operation.

Instead of shouting epithets and making threats, adversaries (a favorite term in the Reagan administration) might try a little listening to minimize the disputes that go to the World Court, and might try a little listening to minimize the disputes that go to the World Court, and might contribute to a mutual understanding that will help achieve "Peace, goodwill among men."