Editorials
Tuesday, June 23, 1998

Shielding two valleys
from development

THINGS are looking up in the adjoining Windward valleys of Waiahole and Waikane. In Waiahole, the state has approved 55-year leases for 93 families. In Waikane, the city has completed the purchase of 500 acres from Azabu USA Inc. and is developing a master plan for a nature preserve.

A proposed housing development in Waiahole and Waikane led to a angry confrontation between the private landowner and Waiahole residents threatened with eviction.The state defused the situation by buying Waiahole Valley, but negotiations with the residents stretched over two decades.

The city paid Azabu $3.5 million. In the late 1980s, Azabu had paid $7.5 million and proposed to build a golf course on the property, but those plans were dropped when Hawaii's economy turned sour.

Both valleys now seem securely protected against development. The Waiahole residents will be able to maintain their rural life style and Waikane will be left unsettled. On an island as intensively developed as Oahu, open space is precious. Waiahole-Waikane will remain an oasis of tranquility.

Burial of Marcos

PRESIDENT-elect Joseph Estrada, who was a supporter of Ferdinand Marcos, appears to be concerned about protests against his decision to allow the burial of Marcos' remains in Heroes Cemetery, reserved for former presidents and war veterans. Marcos died in Hawaii in 1989. His body has lain since 1993 in an air-conditioned crypt in the family mausoleum in northern Luzon Island.

Protest demonstrations by Marcos opponents followed the announcement that Estrada had approved the burial, which had been forbidden by his predecessors, Corazon Aquino and Fidel Ramos. Aquino joined in the protests.

Estrada released a copy of his letter to former first lady Imelda Marcos laying down three conditions for his consent to the burial. It specified no organized groups would be allowed along the route to the cemetery, the rites should be strictly religious and the funeral should be limited to the immediate Marcos family of not more than 50 persons. No political statements would be permitted.

"My motivation is simple," Estrada said in his letter. "I hope that by finally laying to rest his (Marcos') mortal remains, the decade-long turmoil over the issue will subside." The contrary seems to have been the result of Estrada's initial announcement, which evidently prompted release of his letter to Mrs. Marcos. But even full compliance with the restrictions probably would not mollify Marcos' opponents.

Communist guerrillas claimed they were forming special units to kidnap Mrs. Marcos, her children and Marcos's associates and put them on trial for "crimes against the people." This prompted outgoing President Ramos to order tighter security for the Marcos family.

Ramos said he had also directed the military and the police to ensure that the rebels did not disrupt Estrada's inauguration as president on June 30. Although the communist New People's Army has been greatly weakened in recent years, it is still capable of the occasional terrorist incident.

Rather than lay the Marcos issue to rest, Estrada seems to have reopened old wounds. This is a distraction the new administration didn't need. There is suspicion in Manila that Estrada will end the prosecution of charges against Mrs. Marcos and attempts to recover the stolen Marcos wealth. That would be a defeat for the cause of justice and for the attempts to preserve Philippine democracy.

China’s MFN status

PRESIDENT Clinton's disclosure that he favors permanent most-favored-nation (MFN) trade status to China, coming only a few days before his state visit to Beijing, must be interpreted as a conciliatory gesture toward his nominally communist hosts. The question is what if anything the Chinese will give in return. Probably a lot less.

In the abstract, Clinton has a point. The annual debate over renewing China's MFN has gotten tiresome. Barring another Tiananmen massacre, it is highly unlikely that Congress will ever overrule the president and cancel China's MFN status, which is held by almost every other country.

Nor do we think it would be advisable. Such an action would put relations with China at a minimal level and could provoke a dangerous response by Beijing. It would be one step short of severing diplomatic relations.

However, it is ironic to find Clinton talking this way after winning election berating George Bush for coddling the Chinese Communists in the wake of Tiananmen and vowing to deny China MFN. Once in office, Clinton blithely reversed course and began defending MFN.

The annual MFN exercise, although the result is predictable, serves the purpose of providing an occasion for the venting of criticism of China, much of it deserved. And if the danger that MFN will be withdrawn is remote, the fact that the possibility exists may have a modicum of influence on Beijing's policies.

A representative of Human Rights Watch/Asia called the annual MFN renewal "one of the few levers remaining (for dealing with China) that the administration hasn't jettisoned."

China may interpret Clinton's remarks as an indication that he has abandoned all efforts to curb its human rights abuses, its attempts to influence U.S. elections and obtain militarily useful information through illegal campaign contributions, its supplying nuclear technology to Pakistan and its violations of trade agreements.

That would be regrettable. And if he has abandoned those efforts, Congress shouldn't.

---

Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership

Rupert E. Phillips, CEO

John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher

David Shapiro, Managing Editor

Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor

Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors

A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor