What they're saying…

Excerpts from recent editorials in newspapers in the United States and abroad:

Feb. 2

Journal Star, Peoria, Ill., on balancing profits and worker safety for miners:

Just three weeks after an explosion led to the deaths of 12 coal miners, two more men died in an underground mine fire. Both West Virginia tragedies have prompted a national outcry for better enforcement of federal mine safety regulations.

But it's hard to enforce rules when they don't exist, or when they did but were deep-sixed.

It's fair for workers to be questioning whose interests federal regulators serve.

The Sago Mine disaster, in which the men succumbed to carbon monoxide poisoning, has miners clamoring for mandatory underground oxygen caches.

The idea first came up six years ago, then was scrapped by the Bush administration. The Aracoma Mine accident, in which a conveyer belt caught fire, has legislators wondering why a Clinton-era rule requiring fire-resistant belts was erased by Bush.

In all, this administration has junked 18 proposals for the Mine Safety and Health Administration.

But look who's running the show. Until 2004, it was Dave Lauriski, a former mine executive who's been accused of covering up a toxic coal slurry spill by Massey Energy, owner of the Aracoma Mine. His nominated replacement, Richard Stickler, is a longtime coal man whose Pennsylvania mine safety record has come under fire.

Many presidents, including Bush's predecessor, have made dubious appointments. But this leader's nominees stand out either for their inexperience -- a la FEMA's Michael Brown -- or their cozy ties to the industries they govern.

Recall that now-indicted former Enron CEO Kenneth Lay once was eyed for Energy Department secretary. ...

Worker protections and corporate interests don't have to be mutually exclusive. The Senate must vet Bush's new mining administrator to ensure his interests aren't tilted too heavily toward either. In the meantime, it would be wise to revisit those 18 junked mine proposals so that the safety of West Virginia -- and Illinois -- miners isn't compromised further.

Feb. 3

Citrus County Chronicle, Crystal River, Fla., on the death of Coretta Scott King:

Our community joins the nation in its sorrow over the death of Coretta Scott King. And in that remembrance comes a respectful legacy that will continue to inspire and give lessons of hope.

History has proven that there was much more to this woman than her status as the wife of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Thrust into the forefront of a civil rights crusade that would often expose her young family to retaliation from those who opposed any change to the old system, she will be remembered as the passionate and powerful lady who stood by the cause and stood by her husband. The impact of this dignified strength and support remains a gift to all Americans.

After the assassination of her husband in 1968, Mrs. King did not go into seclusion to be remembered only as the widow of the slain civil rights leader. Rather, she continued her mission to fulfill her husband's vision and became a profound advocate for human rights. Still maintaining the quiet dignity that was her trademark as well as her weapon, she moved forward to cultivate her husband's principles of nonviolent social change to fight poverty, racism and war.

Her message may not have been delivered from a mountaintop, but it was as loud and triumphant as one of the greatest speeches ever delivered.

Coretta Scott King will be remembered for her courage and her strength. She will be revered as a patriot and a woman who taught us all to fight our battles with unrelenting conviction that is more powerful than hatred.

Feb. 7

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, on progress in Afghanistan:

A high-level, 60-nation meeting was held in London last week to assess the state of Afghanistan four years after the Taliban were ousted. Participants judged that the country was doing reasonably well and pledged an additional $10.5 billion over five years to help it further along.

What is manifestly true is that Afghanistan is better off four years after American military intervention than Iraq is three years after the U.S. invasion and occupation of that country.

That assessment is not to underplay the problems of Afghanistan. They are numerous and difficult, and the London conferees looked at them quite honestly. The principal dilemma is, perhaps, the great pervasiveness of narcotics production and marketing in the nation's economy and external trade. As much as 90 percent of the world's heroin and opium comes from Afghanistan. The Taliban government had pretty much wiped the drug trade out during its years of Draconian rule prior to 2001.

The second major problem, also examined at the conference, is the loose control that the central government of President Hamid Karzai has over the territory of Afghanistan, a country the size of Texas. That is a function of the diverse ethnic character of the Afghan population, the significant presence of warlords among the country's leadership, with those phenomena both helped along by weak transportation and communication infrastructure, which retards the development of national unity.

As a short-term bandage to the security problem, and to continue to pursue the Taliban and probably al-Qaida as well, the presence of international forces in the country will be increased, with additional NATO troops arriving.

As to economic aid, which is critical to enhancing the credibility of the Karzai government, the United States will provide $1.1 billion in 2006 and seek the same amount from Congress for 2007.

The United States plans to draw down its military presence in Afghanistan from about 19,000, currently costing about $800 million a month. It has also found its promises of economic reconstruction aid hard to keep, given the difficult security climate there.

At the same time, given the political costs of failure in the face of the argument that the Bush administration shouldn't have started a war in Iraq before fulfilling its undertakings in Afghanistan, it is critical that the United States not walk away from the problems of this South Asian country, particularly given the stake America has in its capable president, Mr. Karzai.

The main problems are drugs and security. The United States can help with both, and should.