Asia Times Online

Letters

Please provide your name or a pen name, and your country of residence. Lengthy letters run the risk of being cut.

Please note: This Letters page is intended primarily for readers to comment on ATol articles or related issues. It should not be used as a forum for readers to debate with each other. The Edge is the place for that. The editors do not mind publishing one or two responses to a reader's letter, but will, at their discretion, direct debaters away from the Letters page.

February 2007

In US's Iraq oil grab is a done deal (Feb 28) by Pepe Escobar, I notice a critical omission. The author does not consider the probability that the ostensibly unjust PSA [production sharing agreement] arrangement would last for the stipulated duration, and the conditions in Iraq that are needed for it to last for such duration. I believe the CEOs [chief executive officers] of Big Oil have enough sense of reality to be far less than ecstatic. Clearly, there must be enough civility and order for oil production, and continuity of the Iraqi government for any PSA plan to be implemented. If the insurgent elements take over Iraq, it will be all moot. There are two general scenarios for civility and order: continued presence of US troops with a barely survivable level of chaos, or civility and order with Iraqi control absent US troops. While the former requires tremendous additional US expenses and populace acquiescence, the latter would be a dream becoming reality. While the first scenario arguably may mitigate the degree of injustice of the PSA, the second seems to expunge it. Moreover, if robust democracy takes root in Iraq, any injustice of the PSA may be ephemeral through the democratic system, with transparency being most relevant. While I am reluctant to ascribe probability to each scenario, I am not optimistic about the viability of US operations in Iraq. Escobar writes, "The approval of the draft law by the fractious 275-member Iraqi Parliament, in March, will be a mere formality." I wonder why the author cannot wait until the actual approval to express his conviction. While I quite agree with the implication that it is too early for the Iraqi Parliament to be committed to such a long-term oil policy for Iraq, I believe the fractious nature of any Iraqi Parliament is inherent of democracy per se (multi-party and pluralism) and additionally upon the backdrop of ethnic differences where no one ethnic group is truly and effectively (salubriously) dominant.
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 28, '07)

Re Iran: Switching the nuclear tracks [Feb 28]: [Kaveh L] Afrasiabi misses one point: Iran will be attacked by the US irrespective of what Iran does or does not. [US President George W] Bush and his cohorts have long ago (before attacking Iraq) decided: Iran esse delendam [Iran is to be destroyed]! But there may be a way out for [the Iranians]: to concede that they are ruled by Israel's Knesset.
Joseph Bodenhofer
Austria (Feb 28, '07)

[Robert M] Cutler's dreams about Turkmen gas are unlikely to be realized any time soon, if ever [New chance for Trans-Caspian pipeline, Feb 28]. With pipelines through Russia already deployed, Moscow can always match any competing price offers. Since most of the gas from Turkmenistan is consumed by Ukraine, it is Ukraine that will feel the impact of Ashgabat's increased leverage most acutely. Ironically, it is Ukraine that until very recently was the most enthusiastic proponent of rerouting Central Asian gas to bypass Russia. That, according to [Otto von] Bismarck, is like "committing suicide out of fear of death". Russophobia sometimes trumps even geography. With Turkmen gas already over-committed, and [late Turkmen president Saparmurat] Niyazov's claims of huge new reserves still unsubstantiated, new pipelines to Europe would be as economically feasible as burning money in the bonfire. Still, just by the virtue of being tabled, these proposals increase Turkmenistan's bargaining power and thus the price of gas. European consumers will be the ones to pick up the tab.
Oleg Beliakovich
Seattle, Washington (Feb 28, '07)

Re the article with another idiotic name, The jihadi ate my homework [Feb 24]: I could only say that it has become an irreverent habit of some writers to associate anything as perverse as their intellect with the word "jihad", which correctly translated would mean "inward righteousness, nobility and piety" as well as an outward struggle to eradicate evil, hate, anger, suppression and oppression, transgression and aggression, injustice and inequality and to struggle for personal liberty and freedom of one peoples from the oppression. Japanese kamikaze pilots, Tamil Tigers or Tibetan fighters are not called Buddhist terrorists, IRA [Irish Republican Army] and Basque terrorists are not called Christian terrorists, Nepalese and Assamese fighters not called Hindu terrorists, but why not? They took and take up arms against oppression and occupation of their land and commit as many atrocious barbarities as any other freedom fighters do. Japan's kamikaze pilots are to be honored in a new film being released in May, I Go to Die for You, praising their bravery, sacrifice and "beautiful lives" in World War II. The film tells the story of the young Japanese men who were trained for suicide missions to die a noble death for their country and monarch. Even now, these suicide bombers are revered, venerated as martyrs by 60% of the Japanese, while few consider them as brainwashed lunatics born into poverty seeking glory. Almost 5,000 kamikaze were sacrificed in a futile attempt to change the course of history in World War II. These pilots were promised enshrinement as gods at Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo. They were considered as prized [as the] sakura cherry blossom, which has such a beautiful and brief blossom. They were sent to their death missions with the motto, "Don't come back alive," as in death they would free their families and country. Not all of these pilots came from wretched backgrounds; some of them belonged to the elites of the country. As I have often written, I always condemned violence and consider violent acts of stomach-churning atrocities anywhere as a disgrace to humanity, and a harsh reminder that terrorism in its indiscriminate pursuit destroys the best and the brightest in man. I find the accusation by many that Islam is inclined to terrorism is a stupid terrorist way of thinking. These terrorists or freedom fighters, labeled according to one's choice, are always motivated by the rage of injustice; suffering of their people and cruelty inflicted upon them, loss of dignity, and being deprived of their nationhood and land which rightly belonged to them. They see daily their entire families bombed and killed; their houses and cities bombed to rubble, and this ignominy of humiliation inflicted by their oppressors makes them violent.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 28, '07)

Re Bollywood, saris and a bombed train [Feb 23]: The author of the article should know that the migrants from India form a very healthy share of the wealthiest Pakistanis. The author may also want to keep in mind that the malnutrition rate in Pakistan is 10% less rate than in India, which is 47% (it is 8% for China). China's poverty rate now is less than that to be found in the US (under 9% to 12%). A question to ask is how come Pakistan has 10% less malnutrition rate than India even though [goods] in Pakistan are more expensive. How come they are more expensive and still the malnutrition rate is higher in India? Perhaps the level of poverty of India is higher?
May Sage
USA (Feb 28, '07)

It may be a question of apples and oranges - poverty and nutrition ratings are unreliable when comparing one country with another, especially radically different societies such as China and the US, and more especially when national governments (as opposed to, say, the World Health Organization) are providing the statistics. You do not say where you got your figures or what methodology was used to compile them. - ATol

A fearless India is habituated to blame Pakistan and Bangladesh for whatever attacks take place [in India]. And Muslims in India, if not physically harmed, are at least psychologically threatened. Fortunately, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Nepal and Bhutan are left out. When the Pakistani media have been more or less fully silenced by brokers of peace, Indian media, thriving on government patronage, continue to throw mud on Muslims, the so-called "suspected terrorists". Even when the US holds Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda responsible for the so-called "terrorist attacks", New Delhi and its loyal media harp on vague Pakistani and Bangladeshi hands in the so-called terrorist activities, and don't even think Osama had any hand in these deadly, horrendous activities in India. One suspects that Osama belongs to India and [is] a non-Muslim (or Hindu) disguised as a Muslim planting terror across the globe. That explains why Osama, who is supposed to be fighting for the cause of Islam, does not even bother about the insults to which Islam is exposed in India and tortures the Muslims undergo in the country. Not being a Muslim himself, not even once [has] he criticized the demolition of Babri Mosque ...
Dr Abdul Ruff Colachal
New Delhi, India (Feb 28, '07)

Re Three US reasons to attack Iran [Feb 27]: Things certainly do look dark. What I can't understand is why oil and gas futures haven't gone through the roof - do [US Vice President Richard] Cheney's buddies know something we don't know, ie, that Georgy-Porgy is bluffing and is not going to start a new war, or do they believe, in the face of previous experience, that this time around, US air power will get it "right", and subdue Iran without the need for an extremely expensive and destructive war? (Remember Paul Wolfowitz' prediction that Iraq oil would pay for the costs - to the US - of the brief little war he envisaged?)
M Henri Day, PhD, MD
Stockholm, Sweden (Feb 27, '07)

The article Three US reasons to attack Iran [Feb 27] clearly states President [George W] Bush's position. But if one were to reflect these reasons in a mirror, one [would] see more than three reasons from Tehran that Iran intends to go to war. We have heard from [President Mahmud] Ahmadinejad his desire to wipe out Israel. He has even gone on record that the same fate will befall the US and the West. In action Iran has demonstrated that it is rapidly building a formidable military to meet these threats. Iran has categorically stated that it will not back down [from its] so-called "peaceful" nuclear development and will go to war to defend it. Already Iran is stoking the sectarian flames in Iraq and will not back off from destabilizing that nation. The ground reality is that the world is facing two nations (the US and Iran) who are hell-bent on resolving real or concocted issues on the battlefield. Of these two nations, Iran has been far more straightforward in expressing its desire to be the dominant force in the Middle East and its hatred towards Israel and the US and the West.
Chrysantha Wijeyasingha
Clinton, Louisiana (Feb 27, '07)

Re Al-Qaeda's China problem by Martin I Wayne (Feb 27): I would like to comment on two quite different areas. Wayne writes at the end, "The contrast between China's project in Xinjiang and the United States' actions in Iraq is stark. Where China realized that local politics was a key factor for strategic effectiveness, the US has focused on targeting an ever-growing pool of insurgents and terrorists. China's ultimate success in frustrating al-Qaeda's designs on Xinjiang rests on its recognizing and responding to the political nature of the threat." The alleged similarity between Xinjiang and Iraq is quite far-fetched from various angles. The author seems oblivious to the obvious fact that Xinjiang is a part of China but Iraq, a sovereign state, is not a part of the USA. Americans wonder for how many years US troops have to remain in Iraq and who would finance their country's military campaign, while permanency of Chinese troops in Xinjiang and its development and stability are a natural part of Chinese sovereign right, expectation, and obligation. The level of commitment to each area's development and stability, and the ability to inhibit infiltration of undesirable elements, cannot be comparable. As much as Saudi Arabia is a sovereign state and can sell its oil to whomever, the same would be true for the future Iraq (or its derivative entities). The fact that many of the [September 11, 2001] terrorists were Saudi nationals does not alter this fact. The accusation that the invasion of Iraq is based mostly on oil supply to the USA is quite flimsy. The resources of Xinjiang and Alaska are the properties of each sovereign state, China and the USA respectively. On a different topic, Wayne writes, "For the skeptics, photos of a policeman killed in the raid were also released, showing emotional relatives amid a sea of People's Armed Police paying their final respects. Ironically, China's ability to kill or capture militants without social blowback demonstrates the significant degree to which it has won the population's 'hearts and minds', however grudgingly." I would say that if any government, in any country that is ethnically diverse at one moment in time, manages to create stability "without social blowback", to promote regional economical development, and to win the "hearts and minds" of the minority if only grudgingly, then the government should be regarded as successful in fulfilling its obligations. The touchstone of good governance cannot be based on the wishes of the current generation of ethnic minorities, but the well-being of all in the generations to come. I think that most self-reflecting Americans, cognizant of their country's methodologies toward social progress (forced busing of children and imposed acceptance of the idea of "fair housing" for all, for examples), should realize that the well-being for all in a country is represented by forced exposure toward assimilation, that is, the minorities cease being minorities. A government having an effective assimilative policy, overt or implicit, justifies compliment, not accusation.
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 27, '07)

Al-Qaeda's China problem [Feb 27] is an exercise in false analogy. It is at best a historical [one]. The Qing Dynasty conquered Xinjiang for good in the late 18th [to] early 19th centuries. China's conquest of that non-Han province is thus more than two centuries old. Beijing has its own conception of Manifest Destiny, it goes without saying. [Martin I] Wayne forgets to point out that when China stood up in 1949 under the banner of the Communist Party, Beijing forcefully suppressed any opposition, and clamped down on the Uighurs. The communists vigilantly controlled Xinjiang, and even redoubled [their] vigilance during the Sino-Soviet cold war lest Moscow encourage Uighur nationalism as an irritant to China. We should not lose sight of the fact that Beijing encourages Han Chinese emigration there, and the flow has marginalized the Uighurs. This has encouraged resistance and inflamed a sense of Uighur consciousness, and with the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, this exalted sense of people and nation has grown and has been helped and abetted by Saudi money and military training alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan. And yet in spite of Beijing's harsh and at times brutal measures in keeping law and order in Xinjiang, it has never eradicated the Uighur sense of self nor [Uighurs'] own interests and culture, which is non Han and which takes on an Islamic patina. And besides, as good Leninists, the Chinese Communist Party knows that a single spark can cause a prairie fire, which has hardly relaxed the tight fist of control that it exercises there, on one hand, and on the other, it encourages the implantation of Han Chinese settlement in Xinjiang. So what lessons are there for the United States to learn from China's treatment of Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang, the more especially since China's dynasties have been battling these very same people since the 2nd century CE, and [China] has ruled it for the last 200 years? Dr Wayne might very well have suggested, for that matter, following the scenario of the late Gillo Pontecorve's film Queimada. The lesson learned there is that a scorched-earth policy works well to pacify a hostile population once it has been manipulated (in the case of Iraq) by foreign powers, the more especially since [US President George W] Bush has set off a bloodletting in Iraq between Shi'a and Sunni that seems to have no end in sight.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 27, '07)

The article Nepal: The king speaks his mind by Dhruba Adhikary (Feb 27) was indeed a very interesting piece of writing that gives an alarming picture of the country's future. Being a refined journalist, it was natural for Adhikary to depict an eerie picture that is gradually unfolding by every passing day. Maoists' attempt to make history by being a part of the government is not becoming "elusive", as he puts it. It could be a reality in a couple of weeks from now. They are closer to seizing power by force. They are already making history by carrying weapons inside the Parliament and threatening other lawmakers. Nepali people should take Maoist supremo Prachanda's hurriedly made statement about their weapons as an indication of their deceptive design hidden behind the facade of "joining mainstream politics" through peaceful process. It is a part of their long-term strategy to establish a totalitarian regime in Nepal. The Nepali king's message to the people on the occasion of Democracy Day was in fact a byproduct of the present government's miserable failure to establish law and order and deliver anything that the political leaders assured the people. Despite their high-sounding words, the country is collapsing into anarchy, a point Adhikary appears to have missed emphasizing. There is no doubt about Prime Minister [Girija Prasad] Koirala's commitment to democracy and human rights. However, his team, particularly the home minister, does not seem to be cooperating with him. Under the circumstances, Adhikary is right in mentioning [how the] Bangladesh Army has intervened to clean up political corruption. Nepal's hope hinges on the integrity and efficiency of the Nepalese Army in defending the country's territorial integrity and sovereignty and preventing it from falling apart on ethnic lines.
Ratna Bahadur Rai
Kathmandu, Nepal (Feb 27, '07)

I thought your comment on Ratna Bahdur Shakya's February 26 letter was deliciously witty and hard-hitting. In my view, his letter was more nationalistic than rationalistic. To start with, it is true that the village of Lumbini in present-day Nepal was indeed the exact birthplace of Gautama, the Buddha. Mr Shakya's accusation that Raja M (India rediscovers its Buddha roots, Feb 24) deliberately distorted and omitted this illustrious name sounds more like a display of juvenile jealousy. The column was about the Indian Tourism Ministry's (and not Nepal's) tour campaign and nothing else. Shakya is partially right in his claim that at the time of the Great Buddha, Nepal did not exist and India consisted of many kingdoms. It is best this is where he should stop and listen! My explanations are as follows. The great landmass of the Indian subcontinent was criss-crossed and well traveled by its inhabitants even before Buddha's time. As early as the 5th century BC. The Greek historian Herodotus observed that "of all the nations that we know, it is India which has the largest population". The fundamental unity of India is emphasized by the name Bharata-Varsha, or land of Bharata, given to the whole country (today's official name too) in the Epics and the Puranas (ancient tales) and the designation Bharati Santiti, or descendants of Bharata, applied to its people. In Vishnu Purana II.3.1 it says, "The country that lies north of the ocean and south of the snowy mountains is called Bharata; there dwell the descendents of Bharata." It is in that landmass, known today as India, [that] Gautama the Buddha was born and raised as a Kshatriya prince within the Hindu caste system ... I strongly believe the more the travelers in Gautama Buddha's land, the merrier!
Prabhu
Ottawa, Ontario (Feb 27, '07)

I just read the Indrajit Basu article on the online drug dealer that was busted lately [Busted: The online narcotics dealers, Feb 16]. Basu repeatedly calls the people who shop [for] these medicines online "addicts". Note that [Sanjay] Kedia, who is alleged to be the head of it, concentrates his selling in North America. Maybe Mr Basu, who lives on the other side of the world, is not aware that (a) it is harder and harder to purchase health care in [the United States of] America, and (b) doctors here will not write a pain prescription out of fear of troubles with the DEA [Drug Enforcement Administration] and/or this Judeo-Christian sentiment that suffering is somehow noble. Those of us in the latter description who have been desperately trying to get help for chronic pain and who have been turned away from legitimate sources with the admonition to "buck up" have found sources like these to be life savers. We have nowhere else to go. It is an ugly problem that the US continues to ignore, while those of us at the bottom of the pile wonder what is going to be taken away from us next.
Chris Kaye (Feb 27, '07)

The remarks of Salt [letter, Feb 26] on the spy satellites sent up by Japan is entirely uncalled for and irrelevant. Telling Asians to move on is just like telling Israelis to move on with regards to the Holocaust. Salt should reflect why there is such a fuss about Chinese shooting down their own aged satellite but no one said anything about the shooting down of satellites by the US and Russia in the 1980s. Japan never owned up properly and is currently whitewashing the atrocities Japanese soldiers committed during World War II. If Japanese would own up to what they had done then and stop worshipping the war criminals, the Asians would of course move on.
Wendy
USA (Feb 27, '07)

"He's made a number of assurances over the past few months, but the bottom line is that what they are doing now is not working. The message we're sending to him now is that the only thing that matters is results." The speaker is a Bush administration official and he is speaking about President [General Pervez] Musharraf's failure to rein in the tribal militias that operate in the netherlands between Afghanistan and Pakistan. It might easily have been a congressman referring to President [George W] Bush's failure to rein in the Shi'ite militias that operate in downtown Baghdad.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 27, '07)

With reference to [M K] Bhadrakumar's article Foreign devils in the Iranian mountains (Feb 24), I am reminded of the story of a thoughtful woman who said to her young son's teacher: "My son is very sensitive. If you must punish him, slap the child next to him. That would be enough to instill terror into my son's heart." How refreshing to see that this innovative idea has not been lost on Afghanistan, India, Iran and, indeed, the esteemed writer of the above article. Now that the usual suspect in the region has been kicked, I am sure the American CIA [Central Intelligence Agency] is shaking in [its] boots.
Viqar Ahmed
Dallas, Texas (Feb 26, '07)

North Korea has no uranium deposits, says Donald Kirk in North Korea: Yes, we have no uranium [Feb 24]. An ironic headline to catch the eye's attention? [US] Vice President Dick Cheney in his junket across Asia has expressed deep doubts about Pyongyang's willingness to live up to the terms of the six-power protocol calling [for] a nuclear freeze on the Korean Peninsula by a swap of financial and diplomatic carrots for nukes, something suspiciously very much like the deal the Clinton administration [made] almost 15 years [ago], yet he had the good taste [not to accuse] the Kim Jong-il regime of secretly importing uranium from Niger! Mr Cheney's dismissive tone flies in the face of realty. And this at a time when Mohamed ElBaradei of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency, it was announced, was going to discuss nuclear issues of mutual concern with North Korea. Yes, Pyongyang has uranium. Mr Kirk wastes our time by a series of "he says, she says" speculations by the chattering classes as to "has or hasn't North Korea uranium". The answer is as plain as the nose on one's face: Pyongyang has uranium. How else could it explode a nuclear device? Lest we forget - and alas, we generally do - North Korea is awash in minerals, and among its underground wealth is uranium, and it is guessed [that] Pyongyang has at least 400 uranium mines. Common sense and patient culling of data on North Korea is more welcome than the blather ATol readers are served up with.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 26, '07)

The article was about highly enriched uranium, not deposits of the raw mineral. - ATol

Re The jihadi ate my homework [Feb 24]: I respectfully suggest that Chan Akya expand on this excellent piece by addressing how the anti-family-planning policies of the Reagan administration are contributing to this problem, and how similar policies of the current Bush administration might affect population-resource balances during the next decade, feeding more instability. The "pro-life" position has associated with it long-term adverse anti-life consequences.
Taira Yoshimura (Feb 26, '07)

In reaction to Hisane Masaki's article on Japan's spy satellites [Japan: When a spy satellite isn't a spy satellite, Feb 24], I expect the regular response from Asians of a persecuted disposition, viz Koreans and Chinese, which will probably be to condemn the action and demand another apology. Japan attracts adverse reactions from such people even if it attempts the most legitimate actions to preserve its existence in the face of inimical forces like North Korea and Russia. It is probably time for Koreans and Chinese to move on with respect to Japan's war-crimes record, and particularly for them to stop demanding apologies at every opportunity. Today's Japan is very different from the country that invaded its neighbors early in the 20th century, and must be treated as such. Stereotypes of samurais and sword-wielding pedestrians are as much off the mark about Japan as the notion of depicting Chinese men with pigtails and women with lotus feet. Grow up, chaps.
Salt (Feb 26, '07)

The article [India rediscovers its Buddha roots] by Raja M that appeared on February 24 prompted me to write a few lines and point out how a knowledgeable writer like Raja M makes a futile attempt to distort some established and irrefutable historical facts. In his article Raja M seems to have deliberately glossed over mentioning the name of Lumbini, the sacred birthplace where Gautama the Buddha had his nativity. When Siddhartha was born there was neither India nor Nepal with their current geographical identity. The entire area from the Himalayas down to Kanyakumari was fragmented into hundreds of princely states. Therefore, it is wrong to say that Buddha was born in India. He was born at a place called Lumbini which is in Nepal. There still exists a pillar erected by Emperor Ashoka of India. It is true that he attained enlightenment in Bodhgaya, started preaching in Sarnath and had his maparinirvana in Kushinagar, which are [in] India today. But one should not try to twist the historical facts and mislead the readers.
Ratna Bahadur Shakya
Siddhartha Nagar, Nepal (Feb 26, '07)

As you suggest, modern-day nation-state designations are rather meaningless when referring to the subcontinent of the 6th century BCE. Insisting that Siddharta Gautama was born in Nepal is, perhaps, akin to insisting that Jesus was born in the Israeli-occupied West Bank (where Bethlehem lies today). However, we have amended the article to clarify the point. - ATol

I was shocked to see your publication misspell "Kurdistan" [The smugglers of Iran's Kordestan, Feb 21]. It really amazes me and all Kurds. The Arabs, Turks and Iranians have been trying to hide, steal [and] destroy through fraud and tricks such a huge landmass as Kurdistan; it is not fair for you to follow their example. It is the most regrettable mistake. [I] hope you correct it.
Joseph Dean
USA, originally from Kurdistan (Feb 26, '07)

The article was about the Iranian province of Kordestan, whose spelling is a standard romanization of the Persian name (full name Ostane Kordestan). - ATol

Exposure to gasoline vapors is known to be harmful to health, and accordingly, the government of Thailand is planning to implement regulations to limit these vapors with the use of vapor-recovery units (VRUs) to be installed in petrol pumps and gasoline storage and processing facilities in Thailand. I hope that these regulators are aware that throughout this great land, up hill and down dale, in every town and village, gasoline is sold not just in petrol pumps but mostly in open whiskey bottles in every mom-and-pop grocery store and restaurants right there side by side with your food. If they visit any farmer in the land, they will also find large plastic containers of diesel fuel as well as gasoline stored in their living quarters. I once saw a 55-gallon drum [208-liter] filled with gasoline and covered only with a plastic sheet. It is also common practice in Thailand for people to bring their motorcycles indoors and literally sleep with their motorcycles in a cloud of gasoline vapor. If the regulators are truly concerned about the harmful effects of gasoline vapors, I would think that they would take a more holistic view of this problem in the context of Thailand and not just mindlessly import regulations that were derived in a wholly different cultural and regulatory setting.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 26, '07)

The decision of Nobel laureate Dr Mohammad Yunus to float his own political party to cleanse the political rot in Bangladesh is most welcome, especially [as] it is certain that he has not entered politics for profit-making or for any personal benefits. Since he once rejected the offer from the president to head the caretaker government, one hopes he has some better agenda for the country and South Asia, a region that needs to be denuclearized. Hopefully, he will succeed in his legitimate endeavor to contribute to societal development in a positive way. Best wishes, Dr Yunus, you are the first Nobel Peace laureate to enter politics in the world after having been conferred the award. The world looks forward to your worthy contribution to international politics too.
Dr Abdul Ruff Colachal
New Delhi, India (Feb 26, '07)

China's palace politics by Jonathan Adams (Feb 23) suggests that traditional culture frequently produce fervor that inhibits rational thoughts. Adams writes, "To this day, Beijing has the palace (more commonly known as the Forbidden City), while Taiwan possesses the best of the collection - a fact that has been a long-standing bone of contention for Beijing and for Chinese nationalists. Should there really be a bone of contention? I think most in mainland China should rejoice [at] Taiwan's stewardship of the relics from the Forbidden City. First, as many outside the Chinese mainland would say without hesitation, the relics were spared from the destructive Cultural Revolution. More pertinent today, even if many in Taiwan may not want to admit [it], is that Taiwan's stewardship of these relics constitutes a burden on Taiwan independence. Their exhibition serves as a reminder that the political entity of Taiwan is the result of Chinese civil conflict. Taiwan and the Chinese mainland are not simply two countries that share a common culture, but are two Chinese governments. If museums in Ottawa owned most original portraits of US presidents taken from the White House as stewardship of American cultural relics, would one readily think that Canada and the USA are simply two countries that share a common culture?
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 23, '07)

Jonathan Adams' China's palace politics [Feb 23], with its ephemeral spark of drama between Taipei and Beijing museum directors and curators, sentimentalizes the issue. Taiwan is the repository of China's millennia-old collection of artifacts and art treasures which Generalissimo Chang Kai-shek had the foresight to take along with his camp followers when he retreated from the mainland for Taiwan during the dying days of China's Civil War and Nationalist China's defeat by the communist armies. Had this precious collection remained on the mainland, it is not an exaggeration to say that it would have suffered a million deaths and much destruction during the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution which the helmsman of the East, chairman Mao Zedong, unleashed in 1966. His model was the Qin emperor, who thought nothing of destroying China's arts and intellectual heritage and burying scholars alive and burning books of learning and culture to forge a state made in his image. Much maligned as Chang Kai-shek was and is still, the world owes him an immense debt of gratitude for his saving, preserving and housing the world's largest collection of Chinese art.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 23, '07)

Re Tehran falling into a US psy-ops trap [Feb 23]: Peace deals among Palestinians and among Lebanese are extremely welcome developments, and contribution of the House of Saud towards [them] deserves appreciation and the cooperation extended by Iranians in this respect needs recognition. The policy of the House of Saud in general is stable, level-headed, weighty and solid, albeit not necessarily very "puritan". Under the circumstances when not a single Muslim country or indeed the entire OIC [Organization of the Islamic Conference] have a veto-wielding position on the [United Nations] Security Council, I have difficulty in perceiving how much differently the House of Saud can be expected to act on different national and international issues. They are at least doing something.
Dr Rashid Hassan (Feb 23, '07)

This is in response to Bollywood, saris and a bombed train by Sudha Ramachandran (Feb 23). I have never read a more biased article comprising so many twisted and self-serving facts. The writer, just like [the] Indian establishment, has given the verdict as to who is to be blamed for the [Delhi-Lahore Samjhauta Express] train bombing without even considering the possibility that Hindu extremists, who are equally capable of this kind of act, could also be involved. The writer needs to revisit the events of 2002 in Gujarat when 3,000 Muslims were massacred by lunatics. Then comes the writer's assertion that those who migrated to Pakistan are second-class citizen in Pakistan. This claim is so baseless and ridiculous that I find it wastage of time to even comment on it. But I will, with just one example: President [General Pervez] Musharraf's family migrated from India. Is he a second-class citizen in Pakistan? Then the writer went on to claim how much better off Muslims are in India compared [with] Pakistan. Well, the writer needs to study a recent report published by the Indian government about the state of Indian Muslims in India. Especially, [she] needs to concentrate on just one figure depicting how many Muslims live below the poverty line in India. I recently met a very educated and decent family from Indian Kashmir. They were definitely not pro-Pakistan but they told me how miserable life in Indian Kashmir is. They mentioned horrible experiences of going through multiple checkpoints, daily load-shedding (scheduled power outages) and curfews. Most of the Kashmiri Muslims cannot go to mosque for their evening prayers because of the curfew. Therefore the writer's rosy picture of Indian-held Kashmir is devoid of any facts whatsoever. Genuine criticism of policies and ideas is fine, but one-sided and biased analysis is unacceptable. Moreover, condescending and arrogant behavior displayed by some Indians (especially from within the Indian intelligentsia) will certainly not help with the peace process and not lead us anywhere. Independent analysts should not serve as a mouthpiece of any establishment, be it India or Pakistan.
Imran Mohammad
USA (Feb 23, '07)

If you have a chance, go see Daniel Gordon's fantastic film Crossing the Line. It's a story about the US soldier James Dresnok, mentioned by Robert Neff (Joseph White's walk in the dark, Feb 23). He [Dresnok] defected to North Korea in 1962 and stayed there ever since. The film was shown in the 57th Berlin Film Festival last week. It also has some footage of three other defectors, Larry Abshier, Jerry Parrish and the famed Robert Jenkins.
Paul Law
Berlin, Germany (Feb 23, '07)

Thank you for [Noam] Chomsky's interview [It all comes down to control, Feb 22]. As expected, this independent thinker goes to the heart of the matter. For decades, he has brought to political analysis the same intellectual rigor, lucidity and precision that he has brought to science - all this combined with unshakable moral strength: he simply does not care for pampering the powerful, whoever they are. Of course, many hate him because of these very qualities, but there are also many people who admire him because of these: he's always food for thought as far as I'm concerned, and I hope there will be more of him on ATol, which has become a valuable source of political and economic analyses.
Dr Bittar Gabriel Jivasattha
Switzerland and Australia (Feb 23, '07)

Dennis O'Connell [letter, Feb 22] reacts to [Noam] Chomsky's claim in It all comes down to control [Feb 22] regarding the Bush administration and the September 2005 agreement [on the North Korean nuclear program] as another anti-American diatribe by the noted linguist. It's just another mistake by the "bleeding-heart liberals". I must commend Mr O'Connell for attempting to challenge the good professor in print. Many, with better arguments, have failed in that effort. Once again, I'm afraid, Mr Chomsky is correct. In fact ... the Bush administration announced sanctions on North Korean accounts when the day before [it] had suggested [it was] going to "normalize relations". In fact I'll go one better. This confrontational approach was decided before [the US] presented the impression that negotiations were going on. I don't support the North Koreans, but unless you have been living under a rock for the past 35 years, you should really do your homework before you bring a dinner fork to a gunfight.
Miles Tompkins
Antigonish, Nova Scotia (Feb 23, '07)

I wish to comment briefly on the article Russia's hudna with the Muslim world [Feb 21]. Prophet Mohammed when he settled in Medina with his followers was to constitute a city-state in which Muslims, Jews, Christians [and] pagan Arabs all entered into a social contract and signed [the first hudna] of its kind, reconciliation, cessation of hostilities and a peace treaty between the Muslims and non-Muslims. The constitutional law, first of its kind in the world, of the first "Muslim" state, was a confederacy as a sequence of the multiplicity of the population groups, which meant to Muslims their religion; and to the Jews their religion; to Christians their religion, and there would be benevolence and justice to all. This also meant that the non-Muslims possessed the right to vote in the election of the head of the state [and] they elected Prophet Mohammed as their political head. In Islamic states, non-Muslim communities had always enjoyed a judicial autonomy, not only for personal status but also for all affairs of life including civil, penal and others. Judicial powers were delegated to Christian priests and the Jewish rabbis in the reign of many caliphs. In the time of Prophet Mohammed, the Jews of Medina had their synagogue and educational institutes functioning, and in treaty with the Christians, Prophet gave a guarantee not only for the security of person and property of the inhabitants but left the nomination of bishops and priests to the Christian community itself. In an Islamic state, non-Muslims constitute a protected community and it is therefore the duty of the governments to protect their legitimate interests. The most famous hudna in the Islamic history was the Hudaibiyah Agreement between Prophet Mohammed (PUBH) and the Quraish of Mecca. The Prophet before proceeding to Mecca attempted reconciliation with the Meccans. He promised them transit security to their trade routes, extradition of their fugitives and fulfillment of every condition the Meccans desired to achieve reconciliation. The two contacting parties promised at Hudaibiyah in the suburbs of Mecca, not only the maintenance of peace but also the observance of neutrality in their conflict with third parties. The biggest problem that confronts the Muslims these days is that they are denied justice in Palestine, Kashmir, Chechnya and many other parts and that causes them to take up arms against their oppressors and fight for their rights, freedom, liberty, honor, dignity and homeland. If the Russians are trying to achieve hudna with the Muslim world, they have to balance their juggling act and stop persecuting their Muslim minorities and start respecting their dignity and freedom. All these oppressed and suppressed people want is justice, live in dignity without fear of their lives, peacefully in their homes and homelands, not humiliated daily; and stop seeing their mothers, fathers, brothers sisters and children killed in hundreds daily.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 23, '07)

And of course no one is oppressed in Muslim countries. See Dubai lives the post-oil Arab dream (Jun 7, '06). - ATol

We would be glad to pay, say, US$40 per year to subscribe to your indispensable publication.
Dan and Dee Fritz
Akron, Ohio (Feb 23, '07)

We are looking at a number of options to enable us to maintain and improve this website. No decision will be made without consulting our loyal readers. In the meantime, please click on some of our sponsors' ads to help us out financially. - ATol

What a cute little unusable inputting system for "Letter to the Editor". What a waste. Never mind with the actual subject - this inputter is ridiculous.
Wingnut (Feb 23, '07)

We assume you are referring to the Letters to the Editor form in the Media Kit. We haven't had any other complaints, and we note that even you managed to get it to work. If you find it too much of a challenge, try using the e-mail address at the top of this page. - ATol

Re US gets bigger ears in the sky [Feb 22] by Alan Boyd: One of the last sentences in this piece [quotes former NATO computer expert Brian Gladwell as saying], "We can't have a global e-commerce until governments like the US stop state-sponsored theft of commercial information." I can say, in my 78 years of paying attention, that this will not happen until after the total collapse of "Big Sam" - which I do believe is imminent. The USA is a self-serving loose cannon in our world, which should not/cannot be trusted, under any circumstances. The nations which submit to being "American-led" have only themselves to blame.
Keith Leal
Pincher Creek, Alberta (Feb 22, '07)

[Re] China targets more than a satellite (Feb 22) by Patrick M Cronin ... Shouldn't it be absolutely obvious that China targeted more than an old satellite? If there were a technical need to shoot down one, then the issue would have been rather moot. Indeed, the issue is virtually moot, as nothing concrete would result from just one ASAT [anti-satellite] test. Implicit is that China's rise to a … power that challenges US dominance in some areas is inevitable, and has to be and is acceptable to the US. While US (and other Western) ideologies do influence China significantly, [a] realistic goal for the US is that China remains a status quo power that stays within the confines of diplomacy (such as diplomatically recognized territorial claims - Taiwan), not the confine of US ideologies. Cronin writes, "China wants a tranquil re-emergence, but the anti-satellite test (ASAT) suggests it is willing to accept the risk of being perceived as a military threat rather than cede future superiority in space to the United States." What else does one expect? China has indicated that it would not repeat such a test (any time soon, that is). In the coming decades, expect China to push to the edge of the envelope occasionally and then strategically retreat to normalcy. Globalization and other forms of economic integration provide the elasticity, which should be viewed from all perspectives, without ideological mental handicap. Last, I must say that Western obsession with the issue of Taiwan is the result of such mental handicap. Cronin writes, "Taiwan no doubt will view the test, coupled with the PLA [People's Liberation Army] deployment of some 900-1,000 missiles opposite Taiwan, as added coercive and deterrent pressure aimed at keeping Taipei from moving further toward independence." There is the disinclination to consider the crux of the island's geography. The ASAT cannot meaningfully be associated with Taiwan independence, as it is virtually hopeless due simply to the island's geography. After mainland China has achieved lopsided advantages in all fields, when the island's first-strike capability is no longer credible, any resemblance to [a Taiwanese] military defense would be quite incidental. Mainland China would then easily, even with allowable subtlety, disseminate an atmosphere of uncertainty of energy supply to the island. The island would be in economic malaise without the mainland side having to actually fire a single shot. There would be no international reaction, military force or economic sanction, which would vastly increase the chance of eventual war and Taiwan's destruction, to say the least. The only factor in Taiwan's favor would be global consumer resentment of mainland China's assertive (or aggressive) posture toward Taiwan. Such resentment would not go far enough to translate into sufficient losses in Chinese exports, as such a posture would be subtle and not newsworthy enough perpetually. Taiwan would not survive economically long-term and subtle economic abrasion, as it would one day be far too vulnerable.
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 22, '07)

A close reading of Olivia Chung's Surprise over French bank's China pullout [Feb 22] explains why BNP Paribas withdrew from a joint venture with Changjiang Securities. Bureaucratic control and a poor market turned a promising partnership into a financial nightmare of sorts. And thus the parting of ways. BNP Paribas is no stranger to China or Asia, but the bank does know when a deal has turned sour and when to cut its losses. The moral of this sad venture [is] the exception that confirms the rule [that] other foreign joint ventures with Chinese investment banks have [proved] very profitable.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 22, '07)

In the article It all comes down to control [Feb 22], Michael Shank interviews Noam Chomsky and Mr Chomsky's rabid anti-Americanism is on full display. First we are treated to his warped view on North Korea. Mr Chomsky states that the September 2005 agreement failed because "the Bush administration instantly undermined it". Wrong, the day after the agreement North Korea said it would not disarm until given nuclear reactors, which were not part of the agreement. Next we are told that "right away" the US canceled the reactor project; however, it was not canceled until four months later. If four months is Mr Chomsky's idea of "right away", I'm glad he doesn't drive an ambulance for a living. Perhaps Mr Chomsky could use the services of a good linguist. Mr Chomsky states that North Korean relations with the US and others has "been pretty rational. It's been a kind of tit-for-tat history." Perhaps Mr Chomsky would be kind enough to explain what were the provocations North Korea was responding to when [it] killed several members of the South Korean cabinet in [its] bomb attack in Rangoon in October 1983, the bombing of the [Boeing] 747 in November 1987 that killed 115 civilians, and the capture of USS Pueblo in 1968 and the imprisonment and torture of US sailors. If Mr Chomsky can explain these actions, I have a hundred more examples of North Korean murderous brutality that he can try to explain away - I believe this is the favorite pastime of fellow travellers. As for any optimism that North Korea will live up to its agreements and give up it nuclear weapons, this is pure fantasy. We are also treated to the left's view of the Kyoto Protocol. Mr Chomsky fails to mention that the bleeding-heart liberals [who] negotiated the treaty did not include in it most of the countries of the world but that all the sacrifices were to be made by white Western countries, the evil ones in the view of the left. I will grant you that more affluent countries should do more to lower [emissions of] carbon dioxide and other gases, but to exclude China and India and more than half the world's population so white liberals can assuage their guilt is just foolish. China is building a new coal-fired power plant every week and within a few years will surpass the US as the world's largest source of global-warming gases. If they are not already, there are underground coal fires in western China that put out more carbon dioxide than all the cars in America. It must on some level be comforting to be a leftist - the United States is evil, therefore anyone opposed to the US must be good. The problem with those ideas is that they are a crock, and you wind up making excuses for people like [Josef] Stalin and Kim Jong-il. Speaking metaphorically, if the United States were to run into a burning building to save a group of small children, Mr Chomsky would accuse the US of being an arsonist and a pedophile.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Feb 22, '07)

Have the editors ever considered adding Russia to the list of countries on the Front Page [index] of Asia Times Online? Given that 75% of its territory is in Asia, this may be a prudent move.
Roy
US (Feb 22, '07)

Recent articles about Russia can be found in the Central Asia section. - ATol

I enjoy the articles by Henry C K Liu. A bit complex, sometimes scary, because most Americans are not even aware of the economic issues therein. And Asia Times [Online] as a whole is excellent.
Peter LaBella (Feb 22, '07)

In [Russia's hudna with the Muslim world, Feb 21], Spengler says Russia and the United States are natural allies. But if one remembers that he usually skirts Israel's own demographic problems, one realizes that he may actually be wondering about the likelihood that Israel's increasingly powerful Russian immigrants will steal a march on the Americans and strengthen Israel's attachment to the land of their birth. To this day, America's leaders from both [main political] parties regularly go to Israel to bring themselves up to date on what the United States ought to be doing in the Middle East. It's the old story of Israel's brains and America's muscles. Lately, though, Israel's brains are weakening while America's financial muscles and oil muscles are gone, leaving only its armaments. Considering that America borrows from China in order to pay for its armaments, it will have a hard time keeping a technological edge over Russia and China, both of [which] are learning plenty by watching America throw everything it has into fighting the Iraqis who lack access to the puppet government. Israel can see that although the Russians aren't going to play the naive protector that America does, Russia's realism together with its natural resources and generally healthy economic outlook will make Russia a more reliable partner than America will prove to be as it starts looking for villains to blame for its continuing slide. America has its own Russian Jews but the first generation is nearly gone, along with the portraits of [Josef] Stalin or [Leon] Trotsky that they hung on their living-room walls. Their offspring have no intimate dealings with today's Russia, thus leaving the field wide open for the Israelis to explore by themselves.
Harald Hardrada
Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Feb 21, '07)

I refer to Spengler's article Russia's hudna with the Muslim world [Feb 21]. Spengler is such a bigot that he gets a heart attack when countries such as Russia start building relationships with Muslim countries. Well, Spengler, I have news for you: not too far in the future your favorite country, Israel, will be abandoned by Europe and America. The writing is on the wall. Be prepared.
Vincent Maadi
Cape Town, South Africa (Feb 21, '07)

Re Russia's hudna with the Muslim world [Feb 21]: "The United States offers democracy to the Muslim world, and is universally hated; [Russian President Vladimir] Putin destroys an entire Muslim country, and is welcomed as a friend" should be restated like: "The United States offers to take away all the oil from the Muslim world (on pretext [of] democracy). Putin succeeds in preserving Russia's integrity (whether wrong or right ethically!)." I don't think that the expansion of the Russian Empire was against the Muslim world. They happened to be Muslim. They could [have been] other Christians, Buddhists or whatever. I find the entire article the worst one I read on AToI. Sounds like a desperate neo-con trying to heat up again religious hate (now between Russia and the Muslim world - ha ha, pathetic). The same neo-cons [who] realized that they were wrong to try all this without Russia [are] now becoming Russia's defenders. These people ignore intentionally that as time goes on, populations get more informed and educated and they become less religious ... "It will take two or three generations before Russians acquire the courage and the sense of civil society to determine their own destiny after the fashion of the Anglo-Saxon countries." Why should they? They are not Anglo-Saxons at all. Their own destiny? Is our author saying that the British are determining their own destiny nowadays? ...
Volty (Feb 21, '07)

Re Jim Lobe's Neo-cons pull their punches on Iran (Feb 17), and Joseph Bodenhofer's comments [letter, Feb 20], I think the neo-cons are silent on the run-up to the "rubble-ization" of Iran a la Lebanon because their game plan calls for Iran giving them a casus belli. They will provoke Iran into doing something that will "justify" their aggression against that country, or just create an incident themselves. The destruction of Iran will be in retaliation for whatever they come up with as justification. Good thing they just happened to have two or three [aircraft] carrier groups in the area, eh? And the SAC [Strategic Air Command], or whatever it's called now, to help murder millions of Iranians and destroy Iran's infrastructure. If anyone deserves the label "Hun" it's this US/Israeli neo-con group. I hope I will live to see the day that they are hauled up before the Anglo-American War Crimes Tribunal and made to pay for their wars of aggression in the Middle East, just as were their spiritual brethren, the officers of the Third Reich.
John Francis Lee
Mueang Chiang Rai, Thailand (Feb 21, '07)

I wish to comment briefly on Jim Lobe's article Neo-cons pull their punches on Iran [Feb 17]. The duplicitous policy [and] attitude as well as the ongoing dangerous nuclear standoff of the USA and Europe against Iran [are] shameless and gutless. Whereas it is okay for the United Kingdom to upgrade its Trident submarines deterrent defense against Russia's increased defense spending considered as a serious threat to its security, it is immoral for the Iranians to develop and acquire nuclear technology and weapons to improve [their] security. How on earth [do] these hypocrites, [US President George W] Bush and [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair, have the authority to lecture others to refrain from building or improving their strategic defenses? [International Atomic Energy Agency director general] Mohamed ElBaradei doubted his own moral authority and said in his recent lecture at the London School of Economics, "But when they look to the big boys, what do they see? They see increasing reliance on nuclear weapons for security; they see nuclear weapons being continually modernized." He also condemned the "double standards and unfairness" of the world in which nine countries control the monopoly of nuclear weapons. The USA behaves like a mafia gangster [that] extends its territory at the expense of the weak to terrorize and bully them into submission by violent means, blackmail or sanctions. The 1970 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is obliged to enforce bans on all signatories from using atomic power for military purposes and also to disarm. But the big, powerful rogues states of the USA, the UK and Zionist Israel give a blind eye and deaf ears to the world opinion, as we see and know. The warlords in the White House and Whitehall want their world order at the cost of others' justice and dignity, and greedy nefarious imperialism obtained at any price. It is pure and simply the law of the jungle where nothing functions but dominance of the belligerent USA, bully boy G W Bush, neo-cons and the Zionist lobby.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 21, '07)

Israel is not a signatory to the NPT. - ATol

Re Russia straddles Sunni-Shi'ite divide [Feb 17] by M K Bhadrakumar: I'm in agreement with the author that Russia is a far leaner and more agile country than it was. I think the watershed in Russian strategic thinking has to be attributed to the time of the Ukrainian crisis. That event has led to a complete overhaul of the Russian foreign-policy paradigm from hopeless defense to a simple yet sophisticated offense, as Russia simply called the West's bluff and dumped its post-Soviet dead weight on a Western balance sheet. As [Russian President Vladimir] Putin said, you want it, you pay for it. Russian resurgence acquired its present unstoppable tempo shortly after that. Getting rid of [the] Belarusian dependant completes the transition and should only add to Moscow's strength. I also would like to point out that Russia is probably a far stronger country than it looks from the outside. The West looks fine but its internals are rotting away, with some organs stricken by full-blown cancer. Russia, on the other hand, may appear somewhat dilapidated, but its economic fundamentals are world's best, bar none. While 20% of US GDP (prisons, tort litigation, military, bloated and inefficient health care, energy overconsumption) is pure waste that only diminishes quality of life as it grows, Russia's GDP [gross domestic product] is vastly undercounted and underappreciated. On a purchasing parity basis it should approach the [US]$2 trillion mark by the end of this year. If Russia can solve its demographic predicament, it'll be seen as a contender without any reservations. Today Russia has only one ideology - earning money and making Russians' lives better. That's seen as a key to achieving all other objectives. Just as the West becomes more rigid and overextended, Russia is saying: "We are okay with your values, but even more than that we want your valuables." What can be more American than that?
Oleg Beliakovich
Seattle, Washington (Feb 20, '07)

Re Russia straddles Sunni-Shi'ite divide (Feb 17): By proclaiming all the intelligent, responsible, balanced, conciliatory, and pragmatic moves of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, [M K] Bhadrakumar makes me [yearn] for an intelligent and responsible leader. I know that Putin is no saint but he is getting the job done and enhancing Russia's global position in the process. In contrast, I watch a bumbling [US President George W] Bush during his press [conferences] embarrassing himself and Americans who must witness his incompetence for almost two more years. I must say that I wouldn't want to change places with a Russian citizen, but considering Russia's autocratic past, hopefully they are making slow progress under a leader who knows how to broker their future. Let's hope that America's democratic traditions can help usher in an American rebirth, for the Bush tenure can only be described as a winter of despair.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Feb 20, '07)

Re Japan and Pakistan move closer [Feb 17]: Michael Penn has a sharp pen. Eyes should arch up in wonder. Tokyo's sudden interest in Islamabad may make dollars and sense politically, [but] it is a risky business decision. Pakistan is unstable, with treacherous undertows of religion and the military; of bureaucratic rule and ethnic discord; of backwardness and instability and questionable ability to deliver economic growth. Although Japan sees stability in South Asia as "increasingly important for the stability … of Asia and the international community", the looming shadow of China over the subcontinent has spurred the [Shinzo] Abe government to mend fences with the Pakistani military government of General [Pervez] Musharraf, to assert Japan's presence and mate Beijing's predominance in this market. Already Singapore, which looks westward in Asia, for growth and bringing order out [of] Pakistani inefficiency has gained a toehold in port management; China also has an eye on port expansion and a large hand to buy influence. Tokyo is offering more, with the promise of a free-trade zone for its products high- and low-end ([many] manufactured … in China!). It hopes to improve Pakistan's infrastructure, thereby improving communication with roads leading to the heart of Central Asia to the north, and electrifying imperfectly the country's more northern gas-rich province. Japan's gamble won't challenge much endemic corruption, chronic waste of revenues on the military caste which is holding the country from slipping into the abyss of reactionary religious rule, misuse of resources, and hardly alterable rule of a handful of old families, and a debt-ridden economy and an accommodation with Islamic terrorism. Yet politics makes strange bedfellows, and Japan is willing to cozy up to a whirlwind.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 20, '07)

Re Jim Lobe's Neo-cons pull their punches on Iran [Feb 17]: in my opinion it's not difficult to argue why the neo-cons (and [US President George W] Bush) are relatively silent about the impending war with Iran. The argument consists of one word: oil! (1) The Iranians have (credibly) threatened to attack oil facilities in their neighborhood (Saudi Arabia) and oil traffic in the Strait of Hormuz if they are attacked. Better be silent about your intentions! Aren't you good at manipulating the masses, especially if they are Americans? In this case you must do it better afterwards. (2) If you are Bush, do you want soaring oil prices before the war? Since September 2006 "they" have successfully orchestrated the price of oil to a lower level (in preparation of the coming war). How have they done it?: Probably by releasing oil from the strategic reserves (USA, Europe, Japan, Saudi Arabia?). Perhaps you don't have to sell it actually yet. "Paper sales" at a future date will do it as well. Aren't bankers and their cohorts specialists in selling "papers" (even if they are worthless) of all sorts?
Joseph Bodenhofer
Austria (Feb 20, '07)

Re Alan Boyd's article Future shock: Asia is running out of gas [Feb 17]: Thanks for running it. I have this comment: I wouldn't expect benzene to be a groundwater contaminant from ethanol production and use. I do think that the ethanol dream is a pipe dream, though.
Steve Chase (Feb 20, '07)

Since you are not allowing any more members to register for the forums I had to write to you regarding the article Rich bad, poor bad [Feb 17] by Chan Akya. His biggest premise is totally wrong. Bangladesh is a secular country, it's not an Islamic republic. Looks like he never studied the history of Bangladesh. Let him be reminded that Bangladesh was born in 1971 when it separated from Pakistan (a state formed on the basis of religion) to further its aspirations as a secular country.
Omar (Feb 20, '07)

Chan Akya responds: The ruling BNP only came to power by sharing seats with the Jamaat Islami, and has pushed through the introduction of sharia at various levels - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Nationalist_Party.
Claims that Bangladesh is secular are bunkum as the country adopted Islam as its state religion in 1988 - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Bangladesh.

ATol adds: We have not blocked new members from The Edge forum but have had to turn off automatic registration because of spammers. To find out how to register, use this link. We regret the inconvenience caused by spammers, the real "axis of evil".

Gareth Porter's US's smoking gun on Iran misfires [Feb 15] shows how desperate the criminal cabal that is the Bush/Cheney junta has become in its drive to manufacture an excuse to do Israel's bidding and attack Iran. Neither [President George W] Bush or [Vice President Richard] Cheney lets the truth stand in the way of telling a good lie, nor are they below using the US military as pawns to spread these lies. That was the hope of the anonymous EFPs [explosively formed penetrators] press briefing in Baghdad, that since it was presented by the US military, then no one would dare question their patriotism. But a funny thing happened on the way to bombing Iran; journalists started asking hard questions about the claims made - except for those bastions of "integrity" CNN, Fox and the New York Times. Both CNN and Fox took their cues from the White House and were hyping the story about the alleged connections. That is, until the truth started coming out. Then they switched to damage mode, giving out more tired facts about the tragic death of a former stripper. As [for] the NYT, [it published] several articles regurgitating the administration lies. Thankfully, there are excellent sources of actual journalism, like ATol, that astute readers can peruse for the actual truth. As far as the 81-millimeter mortar rounds, that is the size used by both the British and American military. The world is awash in these rounds, courtesy of Uncle Sam and the Brits. For proof of this, one only had to go online to eBay; they had several 81mm mortar rounds for sale. Inert, yes, but think of the possibilities.
Greg Bacon
Ava, Missouri (Feb 20, '07)

A preemptive strike against eBay? - ATol

Michael Schwartz's article Death street: A prelude to madness (Feb 14) needs further elaboration. The same delusion, ignorance and incompetence that [were] the hallmark of the Bush administration getting us [the US] into Iraq is now being matched, getting us deeper into Iraq. The Iraqi people are so tired of the pain that has been inflicted on them that they no longer believe in the cure no matter what is promised. The latest survey of Iraqi opinion indicates that two-thirds of the population of Baghdad wants the US out. Seventy percent of all Iraqis want a firm timetable for withdrawal and 80% believe US presence increases the violence. One knows the Bush administration is not in touch with reality when it refuses to talk with Iran and Syria and only consults with the governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt, ironically countries which provide much of the support and fighters for the insurgency which is killing US troops. With no end in sight because of these insane policies, every day brave servicemen are dying and the Bush administration continues to irreparably damage US security interests in the area.
Fariborz S Fatemi
McLean, Virginia (Feb 20, '07)

If you're looking for thoughtfulness and sobriety and tasteful literary flourish, you won't find it in Kim Myon-chol's Bush waves a white flag [Feb 16]. You're going to have to look elsewhere. The "unofficial" spokesman of Kim Jong-il and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea takes his instructions from the Pyongyang Manual of Style. Kim [Myon-chol] is long on rhetoric and short on facts. His distinctive manner of expression has a certain resonance and flights of hyperbole ... If his view is partial, the tone of his Speaking Freely strikes a note of hope and new optimism. The American president's raising a white flag of surrender is an exaggeration, since anyone who reads the six-power accord signed on February 12 will immediately see that the DPRK made substantive concessions. Nonetheless, Kim Myong-chol has every right to purr at the breakthrough for Pyongyang at the talks, and to point out the sudden prise de conscience of the American president in his attitude to dealing directly and in a regional context with the regime of Kim Jong-il. And after years of forced isolation and wandering in the diplomatic desert, North Korea has come fully into its own on the world stage.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 16, '07)

Re US's smoking gun on Iran misfires [Feb 15]: Strident headlines [every] day: "US accuses Iran of meddling in Iraq, with evidence to prove"; "Foreign fighters are the problem in Iraq! Close the borders with Syria and Iran to stop them!" Never mind the easiest border with [Saudi Arabia], where 90% of these "foreign fighters" cross, according to the US Army itself. Unable to accept or understand their folly, US policymakers are resorting to incoherent screams of "It's not fair, they're shooting back!" or "It's others that done it!" Forty years ago during the Vietnam War, with 600,000 US troops in Vietnam, ceaseless bombing and wholesale slaughter of villages, I recall a parade of US top officials appearing nightly with accusations (and proof!) that there were "hundreds" of Soviet advisers in North Vietnam, that the Vietcong's "secret weapons" were Chinese bicycles used to carry supplies over the Ho Chi Minh Trail, that North Vietnamese were infiltrating or meddling in "sovereign" South Vietnam, that their [Americans'] kill ratio "proved" victory. As a young teenager I would think - who is in his own country in Vietnam? The Americans or the Vietnamese, North or South? If the bicycles were the secret weapon of the Vietcong, then why did not the US Army trade [its] tanks and helicopters to the Vietcong for bicycles? Forty years later, today, the same refusal to understand any reality is manifest at all levels of our [US] government and most of our media. Four years into the occupation of Iraq, after a decade of blockade and bombardment at will, with 150,000 US troops on the ground and 50,000 paid mercenaries in tow; a civil, economic and humanitarian catastrophe in full swing, and the problem is "Iran meddling". Meanwhile, the US Army chief of staff declared to Congress that the US Army, which is recruiting ever more young criminals due to a lack of volunteers, is in danger of being "broken" in Iraq. "Young Republicans" and "College Republicans for Bush" heroically volunteer for booze at fundraisers, and proudly sport their "we support our troops" [slogans]. Not for them the front line. They know what the noble cause really is. And so continues the sorrowful, long slide into decline of an empire [that] never was.
Kali Kadzaraki
Texas, USA (Feb 16, '07)

[Re] the excellent article US's smoking gun on Iran misfires [Feb 15] by Gareth Porter: These are difficult days for [Iranian President Mahmud] Ahmadinejad, with the threat of military strikes looming on the horizon or imminent by the USA and Zionist Israel affecting and testing his nerves. Recently he tried to offset the blame for the row over Iran's nuclear confrontation by claiming in a cabinet meeting that he has been simply obeying orders from his superior and the major nuclear policies were directed by its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. But he is adamant that the Iranians were determined to preserve their "inalienable rights", and his government is determined to implement the national will. He knows that any attack on Iran's nuclear installations will have a disastrous consequences, escalating the terrorist threat and dealing a severe blow to the world economy. Ahmadinejad has thought of many options for retaliating to military strikes by setting off a global economic crisis by attacking oil facilities in the Persian Gulf and closing the strategic vital Strait of Hormuz, where 21 million barrels of oil pass every day. This would force oil prices up perhaps to [US]$100 or more per barrel, causing global outcry and disaster. The Iranians will also stir up more trouble for the Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan and possibly bomb their oil installations to cause maximum disruption to world economies. The European governments have a direct stake in trade with Iran through export credit guarantees totaling 10 billion pounds [$19.5 billion] and Europe would rather see, to [its] economic advantage, that this confrontation is resolved without [an] illegal invasion of Iran [by the US]. But … President [George W] Bush, one of the most unpopular and globally loathed presidents, who does not understand the meaning of "diplomacy", is becoming more bellicose and belligerent in inventing horrendous lies and the silliest of excuses to attack Iran. The tentative nuclear deal reached with the North Koreans points to the fact that any further greedy military imperialistic adventure by G W Bush can be avoided. Just imagine if Iran is attacked: it would shoot the profits of American ExxonMobil, Chevron and Conoco sky high but the ordinary man on the street will suffer everywhere in the world. By the way, also just [imagine] the effect on the purses, wallets and pockets of oil-rich Arab royals, sheikhs, emirs and sultans: they will have more oil dollars in their coffers to buy American F-16s, 747s, cruise missiles, etc, to put in their exhibition shelves as they do not know how to use the articles. Dollars going back to the USA! But Mr Bush should know that it will not be a walkover in Iran as was in Iraq. Iran is a large country with 75 million people, in possession of competent fighting armed forces and a surplus of youth in millions who would sacrifice their lives to gain martyrdom to fight against the Shitane Azam, the USA and Zionist Israel. It would also be difficult for the Americans to locate all of Iran's hidden nuclear facilities and destroy [them]. Another factor that perhaps the pea brain of President G W Bush fails to understand is the stomach-churning scenario of the horrific consequences of nuclear fallout, not only for the Iranians but to the peoples of the entire region. Finally, Iran is not Iraq as under Saddam Hussein, which was under UN sanctions and surveillance for a decade, but is a sovereign state that has relatively normal relations with Europe, China and Russia, which makes it a lot tougher for President Bush to ponder invasion.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 16, '07)

The lighter side of national extinction by Spengler (Feb 13), in its humorous way, shows one universal characteristics, much as a timeless theme, of traditional culture: one generation views traditional culture as imperative to being human, while its offspring, amalgamated in thoughts or genes or both, views whatever fraction left of traditional culture as incidental, haphazard, or even burdensome. The image of my racially and ethnically mixed neighbors resonates with the article. The husband is white with a German name but he is by no means a German-American; the wife is Hispanic with obvious native American features. He is a product of assimilation from various European nationalities frequently so commonplace as to be considered unremarkable, with little flavor of racism. For her, her marriage represents her second (after the Spanish conquest) and likely final assimilation with obvious triumph over racism. Whenever I look at the endearing faces of their children and hear their delightful laughter, I cannot help but consider traditional culture quite inconsequential to humanity and happiness of human beings. The dwindling number of full-blooded native Americans and the demise of native languages in the USA are part and parcel of social progress, at times manifested by social inclusion that culminates in love and marriage between a man and a woman. The marginalization of minority cultures by the majority, denounced and dreaded in some circles, is actually salubrious social advancement. Spengler writes, "This sort of observation applies to all peoples and all times. What makes our epoch unique is the disquieting fact that the most extant cultures are sliding headlong toward early extinction. Unutterable despair attends the prospect of their demise, for the doomed well know that soon none of their tongue and kindred will be left to remember them. Nine out of 10 of the world's 6,700 languages are not expected to survive the century." Former US president Bill Clinton once urged the PRC [People's Republic of China] to aim at preserving the "Tibetan linguistic tradition". I see Clinton's position as quite untenable. I believe the end of the Tibetan language would be socially salubrious for China, as through the majority's language the Tibetan minorities have the equal opportunity in choices in career and, just as important, in courtship and marriage, in the greatest allowable social domain. I believe those who lament the marginalization of any minority culture are often misguided.
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 16, '07)

Note: A coalition of groups representing North Korean defectors in South Korea has filed a declaration condemning the February 13 agreement by the six nations discussing the North Korea nuclear issue. To read the declaration, please click here. - ATol

Re Political battles just beginning [Feb 15]: The vultures are out to pick at the six-party agreement on North Korea's nukes. It was to be expected. John Bolton, a standard-bearer of mossback anti-communism, immediately grabbed headlines in newspapers around the world. He staked out his position, which is hardly new. ATol readers may want to see the current issue of Francis Fukuyama's American Interest, which has an extensive interview with the former US ambassador to the United Nations, for a fuller exposition of Mr Bolton's thoughts. President [George W] Bush has given the agreement his full support, so we can expect from the ideologically driven neo-conservatives' camp wailing and gnashing of teeth. And besides, the influence of government bureaucrats quickly diminishes and public intellectuals from think-tanks have little to do but stab with pens of invective, to little or no avail. As the ink dries on this much-hailed document, it gives one to speculate, would the other "axis of evil" [member] Iran [have] achieved the same end had it detonated a nuclear device? Pyongyang's testing of one such device in October scared the bejeezus out of China, Washington and Japan, which hastened the denouement of the threat North Korea posed for China and its neighbors. The Bush administration delegates authority, in feudal fashion, to regional partners to resolve tripwire situations. France, England, and the European Union have had mixed results in dealing with Tehran. And Washington's laissez aller laissez faire diplomacy towards the Palestinians and the Lebanese has allowed Israel to act with impunity and war. So is the way to put fire under the American president's pants the heat from a nuclear bomb to resolve outstanding questions of war and peace?
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 15, '07)

The dramatic deal struck by Kim Jong-il and George W Bush was brokered by China, and this event serves as a milestone in its ascent as a world power, for it is now clear that it is a global player with clout not only economically but politically as well.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 15, '07)

In reference to US's smoking gun on Iran misfires [Feb 15]: Very good article, but it misses a critical point. The ability of "back yard" machine shops to make conical shaped-charge explosives has been known since the 1940s. They are in common everyday use for penetrating heavy steel casing and concrete in the oilfields all over the world. If the truth be known, I'd bet there were many more IEDs [improvised explosive devices] with US manufacturing marks which had to be discarded when gathering this so-called evidence of Iranian involvement. Every oil-producing country has thousands of these shaped-charge devices, which are used to penetrate the casing and tubing to allow the oil to flow into the producing pipe. It has come to pass that I believe any other government but my own. What a sham!
Ken Moreau
New Orleans, Louisiana (Feb 15, '07)

I like your website very much; ATimes.com is better than most European webpages.
Ejnar Ekstrom (Feb 15, '07)

Re The mother of all genocides (Feb 14): Murtaza Mohsin is notably restrained in not placing blame for the volatile situation in Iraq. But the role of the Bush administration in unleashing the forces of hate must be noted because only American forces have a chance of immediately putting in motion a humanitarian effort to stop the genocide by enlisting the help of neighboring forces to reach some kind of cooperative agreement. It is in the interest of the Saudis, the Iranians, the Syrians, the Lebanese, the Egyptians, the Israelis - all are profoundly impacted by the unrest, by the fleeing Iraqis, by the looming threat of regional war, by the saber-rattling. It would be a great service to humanity to seek a cooperative effort to find solutions for peace, if only Bush forces would act.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Feb 14, '07)

I have to point out one grave mistake in The mother of all genocides by Murtaza Mohsin. He states that Yugoslavia disintegrated after [Josip Broz] Tito's death in 1991 and he sees parallel with death of Saddam Hussein. In fact, Tito died in 1980, a whole 11 years sooner. We in Central/Eastern Europe are little bit sensitive if some "expert" draws parallels about this region to serve his purpose. Mr Mohsin, please get your facts straight. Otherwise, I would like to thank you for your articles about Indonesia/Southeast Asia, especially those by Bill Guerin, Fabio Scapello, Michael Vatikiotis, John McBeth, David Fullbrook and others.
Martin Tocik
Prague, Czech Republic (Feb 14, '07)

It is widely recognized that the lack of a successor of similar strength to Tito led very quickly after his death to the rise of ethnic/nationalist factions within Yugoslavia, and this, combined with a sharp decline in the federation's economic fortunes, undoubtedly set off the series of events that led to Yugoslavia's breakup more than a decade after Tito's death. - ATol

Donald Kirk hit the bull's eye in saying that China may be the big winner in North Korea accord: Now for the hard part [Feb 14]. Although he does not explicitly spell it out, it is obvious that the United States has back-pedaled in its demands, and has quietly on the tip of diplomatic toes had to take a page out of former president [Bill] Clinton's book on negotiating with Pyongyang, which at the beginning of President [George W] Bush's first four years in the White House [was] strongly and vociferously condemned. ATol readers may wish to see the results of Clintonian initiatives toward North Korea in Richard Bernstein's article in the current issue of The New York Review of Books [and/or, closer to home, Henry C K Liu's Clinton's belated path to peace, Nov 1, '06 - ATol]. Six years have gone by and, with little praise for the Bush administration's muscular and less-than-pragmatic calculus of political discourse, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea has joined the nuclear club and made big strides in rocketry. Of course America's pundits had put money on the collapse of the North Korean state during the last years of Kim Il-sung's rule, and gleefully looked [for] its demise when Kim Jong-il took over the helm of Pyongyang's ship of state. It simply didn't happen. And Washington has to accept with bad grace the inevitable, that it has to deal with Kim Jong-il to resolve long-standing issues from more than a half-century ago and the nuclear issue. On Pyongyang's side, it bargained hard, and got less than it had wanted, too, but enough to begin the long process of overhauling its infrastructure and attend to the wants of its people. Still, it recognizes that negotiations will continue, for the Bush administration is holding North Korea's feet to the fire by blocking its access to capital markets. China's arm-twisting has snatched the six-power talks from slipping again into a stalemate and the ramping-up of tensions. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Washington has ceded its influence on the Northeast Asian mainland to Beijing. And thus, owing to President Bush's narrow view of the region and the world, he has further helped erode America's preponderance in that part of the world. North Korea will tactically accommodate its position towards China, which has, along with South Korea, propped up the economically sick man of the region with infusions of much-needed money, food, fuel and investment. Pyongyang's testing of a nuclear device was a move in extremis on the diplomatic chessboard. So, in a way, the Kim Jong-il regime has put a wedge in Washington's door to gain entry towards a process which will sustain the North Korean state, and thus fulfill its vocation in the polity of nations.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 14, '07)

India on the front line in energy war (Feb 14) by M K Bhadrakumar is incomplete. Iran contractually agreed to supply LNG [liquefied natural gas] to India at half the international price of US$7.20 per million British thermal units (mBtu), payable after delivery. Later, India voted against Iran at IAEA [the International Atomic Energy Agency] in October 2005. Iran called off the deal, suggesting it had no contractual obligations as it was not ratified by its Supreme Council. Assuming India to be in limbo, Iran demanded a delivered price of $7.20 per mBtu with an annual 3% increase. International consultant BHP Billiton of Australia pegged delivered cost of Iranian gas to India at $2.40-$2.49 per mBtu. Iran refused to commit to a "supply or pay" contract, which would make it liable to deliver the gas at Indian borders or else pay for the assured quantity. Instead, it expects India to sign a "take or pay" clause where India will have to pay the price if it does not take delivery of gas. India agrees but given the 760-kilometer transit through Pakistan, India insists the pipeline be owned and operated by an international consortium, which would buy the oil from Iran and sell it to India. India wants to obviate both dealing with Pakistan directly and also its (perceived or apparent) motivation to disrupt supplies in future. With the impending India-US nuclear deal (in my opinion, ill-conceived by India), UN economic sanctions on Iran, the mysterious death of Iran's chief nuclear scientist last week (Glenn Beck hinted on CNN it was a Mossad hit job), repositioning of more US aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf, lower oil prices to squeeze Iran's domestic subsidies and war drums beating, there is a change. Iran is now willing to negotiate a lower price with India. India can either spend its money on Iran or the US. It has a choice. If the price is right, [US Congressman] Tom Lantos or not, India will be knocking on Iran's door. I am unable to reconcile with India's IAEA vote against Iran. Iran was the only nation to support India at the OIC [Organization of the Islamic Conference] on Jammu & Kashmir. Interestingly Bhadrakumar did not compare Iran's price to India [with] that charged by Russia to its European customers (linked by pipelines). Won't the Europeans desire to know the price to expect from Iran in 2015?
Srikanth Subramanyam
Greenwich, Connecticut (Feb 14, '07)

I wish to comment on Spengler's delightful article The lighter side of national extinction [Feb 13]. His reference to the passing away of Anna Nicole Smith saddened me. It is a true story of rags to riches. She was a penniless pole dancer in Houston in 1991, when her eye-popping figure caught the eye of J Howard Marshall, a billionaire and one of the richest oilmen in Texas, USA. It was love at first sight for the old man. He had lost his wife and was looking for some kind of solace and was taken to this club on the insistence of his chauffeur, where Miss Smith captivated his mind and imagination; they got married and the marriage lasted for 403 days. As his son later put it, "He had strong yearning for large breasts." He was nearly four times her age and died at the age 89 in 1995. "The hottest love has the coldest end," said Socrates. Love is like a river of fire and you have to drown in it to swim across. St Valentine, the patron saint of lovers, according to legend was a warm-hearted Roman priest and brave old romantic, and risked his life to wed lovers against Emperor Claudius [II]'s wishes. He believed, as some of us still believe, in a deep and lasting love for another person, but sadly, the notion is a rarity now, particularly in the Westernized societies. As Woody Allen said, "Love is to suffer." But if we do not love, we still suffer and suffer we do, nevertheless. Personally, I believe that unless two bodies and souls do not become one, love does not flourish ... True love happens when two become one in body and soul. This is once again seldom found in the modern world of allure.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 14, '07)

Spengler, in his piece The lighter side of national extinction [Feb 13], being his usual outrageous though stimulating self, cops out on the "n" word. Agatha Christie, the English crime writer, called one of her works Ten Little Niggers. Ten house guests in an isolated country mansion in England meet their end one by one. This novel was written during the 1930s when the "n" word was in everyday use. The reading material for primary-school children had pictures of little black sambos - large red lips, big innocent eyes. The term "nigger brown" was used to describe the color of clothes and paint. It was still empire time. Later, as the British Empire began to fade, the color description was changed to "Caribbean brown", some say in an act of defiance. "Eenie meenie miny mo, catch a nigger by the toe/ When he squeals let him go" was a popular nursery rhyme in Britain right up to 50 years ago. During the 1950s, Ten Little Niggers was adapted as a play for the theater. Its title became Ten Little Indians. This alluded to the subcontinent of India (it is so difficult to let go of the Empire). As for St George and the Irish: he can be mentioned without one becoming terminal. St George and the Dragon, stripped of its more odious associations, is a popular tale for the young in both Ireland and England. St George's Day in England, April 23, passes without being noticed very much. Ask any English person what date St George's Day falls on and you will get a puzzled look. The tabloid press does try to stimulate the English into celebrating it without much success. Extreme right-wing political groups demand that it be made a public holiday. It is doubtful that this will happen now with the UK's sizable Muslim minority. The legend of St George, executed on April 23 in the year 303 under the reign of the Roman Emperor Diocletian for defending the rights of Christians, later became associated with the European Christian Crusades against the Muslims in large parts of the Middle East.
Wilson John Haire
London, England (Feb 14, '07)

The original version of the song "Ten Little Injuns" by Septimus Winner predated Agatha Christie's 1939 novel by seven or eight decades. The US version of Ten Little Niggers was published in 1940 under the title And Then There Were None. Since 1965, British editions of the novel have used the word "Indian" in place of "nigger" not only in the title but in the text. According to Wikipedia, St George is the patron saint not only of England but of Canada, Ethiopia, Georgia, Greece, Montenegro, Serbia, and the cities of Moscow and Ljubljana, "as well as a wide range of professions, organizations and disease sufferers". - ATol

The US is hastily backtracking from its initial position that Iran was responsible for the death of 170 soldiers in Iraq because these soldiers had been killed by bombs made in Iran. It is a wise move considering its own record as a supplier of bombs that kill people. For a start, consider the planeloads of bunker-buster bombs they supplied in the recently concluded war in Lebanon.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 14, '07)

Not to be born is the best (said a Greek philosopher) but to have a good laugh is a good second, even if it is courtesy of Spengler [The lighter side of national extinction, Feb 13].
Joseph Bodenhofer
Austria (Feb 13, '07)

The entire basis for Spengler's [Feb 13] diatribe (The lighter side of national extinction) is premised on a quote from Monty Python, which our beloved scribe not only misquotes, but completely inverts. I have put little credence in the writings of Herr Spengler in the past; now I have absolutely no reason to believe his apparently learned writings reflect anything more than the twisted thinking of a morbid mind.
John Seal
Oakland, California (Feb 13, '07)

The third chorus of "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" is: "So always look on the bright side of death/ Just before you draw your terminal breath." Brobdingnagian Bards provide the full lyrics here. Sing it through and you won't be so cross. - ATol

There's this tribune of reality at ATol with the pen name Spengler,
Whose brilliant essays without fail engender all too much rancor.
Whatever evil he weekly decides to decry,
His many critics inevitably label some sort of lie.
But in the end doubtless he'll prevail over each and every detractor.
Richard Greene
USA (Feb 13, '07)

We've been getting a flurry of rhymes
Meant to cheer up this page on ATimes;
Though they sure aren't the best
What they lack in finesse
More than make up for the usual whines. - ATol

[The mystery of China's lost girls, Feb 13] by Kent Ewing is only lightly researched and lacking in the sort of world-class credibility and insight you say you want from your correspondents. Case in point: the ministry in question began to place onerous restrictions on external adoptions as early as January 2001. And why not? If the majority of adopting families outside China desire girls, and if there is a shortage of girls in China, why not keep them home? What state would do [any] different, given similar circumstances? By only hinting at such things and by suggesting China needs to make itself accountable for failing to meet up with his presumed standards, Ewing appears to be China-bashing. We need less simplistic analysis and more accuracy and depth than what this article provides.
Joe Parker (Feb 13, '07)

Not long ago China announced some new rules and criteria governing adoption of orphans, which helps to safeguard the well-being of the children and improves the hitherto deficient adoption process. This small, simple attempt at improvement elicits criticism and attack, unfortunately, after announcement of the new rules, as in the article The mystery of China's lost girls by Kent Ewing (Feb 13). The latter suggests that it is preferable for many of the "guesstimated" millions of girls to live in the households of unqualified parents than to "languish" in the poor orphanages in China. What a sweeping condemnation! This brings to mind that no constructive move escapes criticism by "well-wishers". Examples: Hydroelectric and railway projects ruin the environment. Punishing corrupt officials is an excuse for purging and consolidation of power. Economic development in the poor western provinces marginalizes the minority population. Open trading and aid in Africa constitute a prelude to neo-colonialism. Experimental downing of one's own outdated satellite, practiced years ago by others, means militaristic threat. Fortunately these grumblings and mumblings come and go. They serve as a useful outlet for some people, who, for whatever reasons, must comment and write something as if to satisfy an urge to pontificate.
S P Li (Feb 13, '07)

Sunny Lee deserves a round applause for his Speaking Freely Lost in translation at the six-party talks [Feb 13]. We now know that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, more commonly known as North Korea, puts a high premium on the proficiency and excellence of its translators. Pyongyang leaves nothing to hazard when it comes to stating its own positions. On the other hand, we learn for yet another time that the world press, on the whole, treats North Korea shabbily and with distrust and a certain disdain. North Korea pays it back in kind. Translation from one language to another, as Mr Lee lays stress on, is not only a matter of finding the just word or idiomatic expression, but presenting as accurately and correctly the intent of the speaker, and this is the more especially true in Pyongyang's position at the current session of the six powers in Beijing. Mistranslation adds a further element of distrust and a faulty understanding of events and positions. It lends itself to misinterpretation, if not a deliberate [bias] to a side of the controversy favoring one side over the other. If it is not an impetuous attack, mistranslation bowdlerizes phrases either considered vulgar or wooden or simply makes content sugar-coated for the general reading public, and this leads to a mistaken grasp of the issues at stake. North Korea has a sui generis style of its own. It has a vocabulary which often makes it hard going to read. But it states its positions strongly and clearly. As Mr Lee so well shows, Pyongyang never shies away from hard bargaining. Journalists, on the other hand, are no delicate flowers. They belong to a guild to get the news out, so they shouldn't stand on ceremony but get the facts right and straight. In Pyongyang's case, they should exercise more patience, which may not be easy but is necessary. Finally, it strikes me as though Sunny Lee knows of what he is speaking and from personal experience as a journalist stationed in Beijing.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 13, '07)

Re Dogfight for lucrative Indian warplane deal [Feb 13] by Sudha Ramachandran: I think political imperatives will force India to allocate most of the 126-plane order to US firms. That's why in order to placate Russians, India pre-announced purchase of 40 Su-30 MKIs. Indian desire to reward the US and multiply its options is understandable. For potential conflict with Pakistan, India is probably planning to rely on Russian hardware, whereas to counter China - a case in which Russia conveyed to both sides its determination to either support both sides or none - it would prefer American weaponry. Still, Indians see the US as a fickle and over-politicized supplier, and wish to keep the Russians satisfied enough to keep them away from bidding on any Pakistani procurement. That should ensure plenty of Indian orders going Moscow's way, if not this time, then next.
Oleg Beliakovich
Seattle, Washington (Feb 13, '07)

In Islam as a political issue in China (Feb 10), I read that Ye Xiaowen, director of the State Administration for Religious Affairs, was critical of [US President George W] Bush regarding his conduct of the "global war on terrorism". If Ye had a combination of greater [insight] and audacity, he could have asked Mr Bush a rhetorical question: Who has the greater tendency to take umbrage and to the greater degree, a disbeliever in the USA who has to look at "In God We Trust" every time he uses his country's currency, or a believer in China who has to worship in a state-registered church?
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 13, '07)

After reading Conn Hallinan's original column [The Vishnu strategy meets its match] (Feb 7), his follow-up explanations (Feb 9) and the ensuing criticism by his critics (Feb 7, 9, 12), I thought of jotting down few of my pennies-worth comments. I did not find any deliberate intent or desire on the author's part to insult millennia-old Hinduism. The author was simply following the age-old techniques of many writers who sprinkle snobbish French phrases [and] tongue-twisting German words to give a pseudo-sense of scholarship and impress the readers. In this case the ever-present Anglo-US-Israeli bashing. It seems a catchy title with preferably esoteric interpretations comes in handy to catch the attention of readers. In my opinion, the analogy was crude and the author imitated poorly what went through the mind of [Robert] Oppenheimer - who had studied at least some Sanskrit - when the first earth-shaking nuclear detonation took place in the New Mexico desert. If I were Conn Hallinan's English teacher, he probably would not have got away with any grade better than an F++. So let us leave [it] at that. But then, why would any critic hit the roof and rush to the defense of Hinduism at this time? It was so childish and silly. I would like them to remember the words of one of the most eminent Indians of the 20th century, philosopher and statesman Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan, who wrote, "Hinduism has been able to maintain its supremacy, and even the proselytizing creeds backed by political power have not been able coerce the large majority of Indians to their views" (Hindu View of Life, 1927). So I suggest to the critics that they sip up lots of good masala chai and then relax.
Prabhu
Ottawa, Ontario (Feb 13, '07)

At least Hallinan didn't misquote Monty Python. - ATol

Thanks to the strenuous efforts by the world ruling circles and the global media mafia, the Muslims are now better known as the so-called "terrorists" and, even worse, "suspected terrorists", especially in India and the US. Given the existing anti-Islamic international environment it won't be surprising if, sooner than later, the encyclopedias and school textbooks define Islam as the religion of terrorists and suspected terrorists and a forum that generates "terrorist outfits" and encourages "cross-border terrorism" etc, and requiring children, even in Arab nations that promote US interests in Middle East, to learn by heart these definitions. The way the core global media still try to justify the destructive actions of the USA and its cohorts only confirms that this is not just a mere imagination. There [are] a whole lot of specialists even among academicians on terrorism today and terrorism remains a hot subject in debating clubs. The "terrorism" trend will not just be allowed to die down by the West either.
Dr Abdul Ruff Colachal
New Delhi, India (Feb 13, '07)

"But war is also the continuation of false consciousness/ And falsified policy and politics/ And greed masked as bourgeois generosity/ By the falsified desires of American imperialism/ By presidents wedded to cowboys and missiles/ By chauvinist beer salesmen peddling stars and stripes by the six-pack/ By the trained psychotic liars of the State Department/ By the simple minded sods in all 50 states ..." - from "A Momentary Belief in the Wisdom of the Common People and a Curse on the Bastards Who Own and Operate Them", Thomas McGrath, 1916-90. Every time I read another powerful writing by Pepe Escobar, I am reminded of the late Great Plains poet Thomas McGrath, who wrote of the fallacies [and] bittersweet ironies of past failures and injustices effected by US foreign policies and insurgencies. Tom McGrath was blacklisted during the notorious McCarthy era but rose again as a voice of conscience during the Vietnam War and spoke up against US atrocities agitated directly or indirectly in Latin America; those actions still supported by the still-functioning training school for torture, the infamous School of the Americas - which Escobar documented in two previous articles [eg Bush, OPEC and Chavez of Arabia, Dec 7, '06]. After reading David Simmons' review [The Roving Eye's grim world view, Feb 10] and excerpt from Pepe Escobar's book Globalistan, I have ordered two copies. Call it a gift to ourselves for Valentine's Day - a necessary act so both members of this household can read without one of us breathing over the other's shoulder. What better way to note this day-of-hearts - even when aware of the many hearts now broken, betrayed by the deeds of our leaders? As I write on a late Sunday afternoon, the radio reports "another chopper down" - seven, or was it eight dead this time? And it will surely be followed by a second soundbite, belatedly reporting more Iraqis killed in the streets of Baghdad. For Pepe Escobar, wordsmith/prophet/poet and all the quality journalists reporting what others dare not; plus Asia Times Online staff, I wish you all a happy Valentine's Day, you who continue to deliver the best of the best in investigative journalism.
Beryl
Minnesota, USA (Feb 12, '07)

Re Globalistan by Pepe Escobar [review, The Roving Eye's grim world view, Feb 10; excerpt]: Boring! Boring! Boring! I am still waiting for Mr Escobar to offer some alternatives; he sounds like another "radical with assets", or someone who wishes to be one. The world is the way it is; neurosis is the inability to accept the world on its own terms - there is something called legitimate suffering and we are all part of, as much as we are all part of nature. The zebra is killed by the lion, we kill the lion. Utopian thinking gets us nowhere; it only creates greater problems and destabilizes a world that is doing what it must do - we do what we do because we can do no other. If Mr Escobar has an alternative grounded in reality, I would very much like to hear it - I wish he would grow up. There are only four things we can do, and they begin with us: (1) fight the Nazi in ourselves; (2) do not be enamored by power, the wish to be like those who oppress the world; (3) find alternatives and test them out; try different matches, different possibilities; (4) be nomadic - see the world, all of it!
Joseph M Giramma (Feb 12, '07)

Beijing's shot across the ship of state United States' bow last week has hardly raised an eyebrow in the America press. The not-so-veiled warning came from a strange quarter and by an eccentric source: Ye Xizowen, director of the State Administration for Religious Affairs, who minced no words as to George W Bush's war on terror from the high pulpit of Christian self-righteousness [Islam as a political issue in China, Feb 10]. It may seem ironic that People's China, whose track record on religion within its own border leaves much to condemn, be it in Tibet or Xiajiang or the hidden Christians or even in the non-relenting war on Qigong, lectures the United States' reborn Christian president. Yet, on hardly closer inspection, the answer is not hard to find: Mr Bush's offensive but haphazard and at times blind spots in launching a war in Iraq, belligerent moves against Iran, and failed diplomacy to rope in the maverick North Korea have [shown], as Mao Zedong used to repeat ad nauseam during the heyday of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, that all was not all right under the heavens, and by this he meant that conditions were ripe for revolution. But that is not the intent of Mr Ye's words. The confusion and the growing ranks of Muslim fundamentalists willing to do battle in hot and guerrilla wars have grown exponentially since the Bush administration has gone to war dumbly, ill-prepared, and with a lavish display of showmanship with barely encouraging results. Beijing uses weights and measures which further it own interests: Is it good for China? This is a standard hardly out of the ordinary. And to Beijing, President Bush is putting sticks in its wheel of vibrant, strong economic growth and expansion on its road to becoming a world power. Call China's rebuke self-interest, but the Chinese leadership see broader and wider dangers, and not only to China's aims and goals. Thus the urgency for the Communist Party leadership with its capitalist aspirations [to take] on the American president on his own turf, and that is challenging Mr Bush's cherished religious beliefs, in terms that strangely echo Muslim critics of Washington: the donning of the mantle of the Knights of Malta and assuming the aura of a 21st-century crusader. Saying this, it then comes not as a surprise that Russia's Vladimir Putin lends his voice to a rising chorus of discontent with Mr Bush's muscular unilateralist war on terror, which he [Putin] sees as shaking the pillars of the world economy. Hard-headed George W Bush will stay his course. He burns with the fervor which through hubris and wrong-headedness has the glow of [Richard] Wagner's Goetterdaemmerung.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 12, '07)

In his article The Vishnu strategy meets its match [Feb 7], Conn Hallinan may have a point to prove in condemning the death and destruction of innocents in the conflicts of Middle East. But by relating it to the so-called "Vishnu strategy", he has insulted the faith of millions of Hindus, apart from proving that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing". I am sure we do not need to blow this issue out of proportion, but would the author be kind enough to get his facts right before he quotes religious examples? ATol's response [under Bittar Gabriel Jivasattha's letter of Feb 7] that "our original comment was a bit misleading" and "we have learned from hard experience that almost any religious analogy, accurate or otherwise, gets some people in such a froth that there's little point arguing about it" shows lack of responsibility. Most of us agree that the author made a mistake and there is no need to crucify him for that. But it is ATol's responsibility to ensure that people are allowed to respond; [let] a healthy debate through mails happen and if the author agrees, the content be modified to convey the intended message. If ATol has published something which is not correct, don't you think it is your responsibility to remedy it? ...
Sandeep (Feb 12, '07)

Yes, but most of the people who react to anything they perceive as insulting to their religion, whether by error or intent, lose perspective to such an extent that there is no point in continuing any attempt at logical - that is, non-religious (for religion is a matter of personal faith) - debate, beyond making the initial point (as was done articulately by letter writer Karigar on Feb 7, and he elaborates below). Letter writers who wish to criticize ATol stories on the basis of their editorial merit or lack thereof always get an airing here, and always will, but when that criticism deteriorates into a religious sermon we have to cut it short. Otherwise this forum would become just another interfaith slanging match. - ATol

[Conn] Hallinan's distress almost has my sympathy, except of course that he is ignoring the power differential between the accredited scholar with access to multiple avenues of publication ([Foreign Policy In Focus], CounterPunch, San Francisco Chronicle, etc) and readers whose distress is limited to letters to the ATol editor. As a responsible scholar, his defense of "not intentional" is disingenuous, to say the least. He seems to believe he is the underdog here, whereas the underdog is the not-so-well-understood Hindu thought that is suffering under his heavy-handed approach. Is he deliberately failing to understand that the reasons for readers' distress are not with the points he is making, but with the casual way he has coined a new phrase in the foreign-policy lexicon, that of the "Vishnu strategy"? Being a PhD in anthropology (his credentials from the [University of California at Santa Cruz] website where he is a provost), he should know the power of the words that Western scholars use, especially regarding words from a different culture. When they set the context, they force a redefinition of these words. One knows what to think when one hears "Machiavellian strategy", "Nazi strategy", "Solomon strategy", "Vietnam strategy" etc, since the context is quite well known to the reader. By connecting "insane and monstrous" with his own fabrication of a "Vishnu strategy" he has provided a radical new context, one completely at odds with the way Sri Vishnu or the Gita is understood by a billion people. Soon the chatterati will be abuzz with "Vishnu strategy" in the meaning that he has single-handedly provided. I fail to understand why the ideas of Gita, Krishna and Vishnu, sacred to millions of Hindus, should suffer as a "collateral damage" by being dragged into what essentially [is] a US foreign-policy debate. How difficult is it, especially for a PhD scholar, to do some basic checking before latching on to an analogy just because "[Robert] Oppenheimer said it" so it makes good press? Any scholar on Gita would know that a governing interpretation of those Gita lines would be "Time am I, destroyer of worlds." Is it that difficult to grasp the concept of time as destroyer? It has been part of Hindu thought for millennia. One can see his nuanced understanding of Judeo-Christian concepts in his comments here. And the question of his "not taking offense" at the Armageddon analogy doesn't arise. I didn't use [it] to write a major article, I just pointed out [letter, Feb 7] that it was less far-fetched than his "Vishnu strategy" analogy. The point went home, apparently, with accusations of "fundamentalism". Accusing someone of ignorance and faulty scholarship is a far cry from "fundamentalism". Hindus are not even a party to any of the conflicts he describes! Bottom line: he made a religious issue out of a foreign-policy issue. The less said about his line "the speaker is actually Shiva who takes on the form of Vishnu" the better. Unfortunately, by adding another ridiculous statement to the mix, he is exhibiting even more glaringly his lack of grasp of basic Hindu thought. Shiva as Rudra (the regeneration/destruction aspect in general) is quite absent in the Gita, and Shiva and Vishnu do not take each other's forms. Finally, I agree, the analysis merits discussion on its own merit, and one wishes the author would rephrase it without the irrelevant "Vishnu strategy" bit.
Karigar
USA (Feb 12, '07)

Regarding Conn M Hallinan's response ([letter] Feb 9), I completely agree that commentaries must provoke discussions. I am reminded of a D H Lawrence quote: "If you try to nail down anything in a novel, you either kill the novel, or the novel gets up and walks away with the nail." [It is] just that in this instance, the relevant audience (of Abrahamic faith) may walk away as they may not understand the analogy (of a Dharmic faith). As regards the article, we need metaphysics to understand political events just as we need a crane to lift a feather, maybe? I would guess it is Hallinan's problem to nail that.
Srikanth Subramanyam
Greenwich, Connecticut (Feb 12, '07)

Having read the published responses to Spengler's article The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious [Feb 6], I have noticed the following traits in those with opposing views. (1) The letters are vitriolic. The hatred of the letter writers literally drips from the page, with the writers calling Spengler venomous pejorative names. (2) The anti-Spengler arguments appeal to emotion more than reason. (3) Blame for Middle East problems are laid solely at the West's - especially the US - door. It's as though the Middle East is a land filled with saints where violence was unheard of until the West came along. (4) Islam is the only peaceful religion; therefore all others must be warmongers. Much of the [argument] presented in these letters falls on it own sword if one cares to study the history of the Middle East. Violence and bloodshed was present in abundant numbers long before the West had any interest in the region. Rather than belabor the issue, let me say that (1) Spengler has a right to call it as he sees it; (2) disagreements should be based on fact and logic, not unreasonable emotion or fantasy. In closing, let me congratulate ATol for having the courage and integrity to publish such letters of criticism.
Jack Meehan
New Hampshire, USA (Feb 12, '07)

I apprehended fully "The Duel", by Eugene Field, as narrated by Spengler, and thanks but no thanks to him for pointing it out to me the mortality of the two toys [Spengler responds to readers, letter, Feb 9]. The children's rhyme is as sordid and squalid as the mendacious mind could tell. I have always considered it to be unfitting to be told to my children or grandchildren. Spengler should grow up in his Minerva and refrain from preaching his satanic verses and commentaries on ATol, especially to sensible and intelligent adults. Part of the rhyme goes like this:
The gingham dog went "Bow-wow-wow!"
And the calico cat replied "Me-ow!"
The air was littered, an hour or so,
With bits of gingham and calico,
The Chinese plate looked very blue,
And wailed, "Oh dear! What shall we do!"
But the gingham dog and the calico cat
Wallowed this way and tumbled that,
Employing every tooth and claw
In the awfullest way you ever saw.
I will ask Spengler to be nice in the future by telling us some decent or juicy tales and stop eulogizing about death and destruction, bloodletting and bloodcurdling, evil and violence and warmongering of G W Bush's lust for imperial greed, illegally invading and occupying countries with rich oil wells and gas reserves. I hope that Spengler apprehends or comprehends my message of peace with dignity. Saqib Khan
London, England (Feb 12, '07)

If you liked "The Duel", you'll love the version of "Ten Little Indians" presented in Spengler's The lighter side of national extinction, now online. - ATol

I never noticed the "semi-pornographic" ads that John Morris of Toronto, Ontario, refers to in his letter of February 9. Then again, when I visit ATol I am very much focused on the articles, while other readers may already have other things partly in mind. In any case, I for one would be willing to pay a subscription fee to help keep ATol afloat. I'm not about to find the no-holds-barred uneditorialized type of analysis that ATol offers at Reuters, The New Republic or the New York Times.
Jose R Pardinas, PhD
San Diego, California (Feb 12, '07)

Blame this letter on the fact that we have been snowed and that "faute de mieux", as the French say, I perused a few of the letters to ATol's editor, and did read [John] Morris's [Feb 9] in which he requests to "eschew such ads" in reference to ATol's continued inclusion of semi-pornographic ads. It then hit me like "eureka" that for ATol to keep Mr Morris as a regular without losing all other regulars including myself, seeing his dedicated effort to continue to uphold his particular standard, ATol might provide his computer its daily "sans demi- or full porn" if he pays for a "clean" copy. An individual so dedicated to reading ATol's contributors without having to suffer by having to view any female form should have to pay for that privilege. It's only fair to the [other] 99% readers of ATol. (Unless of course this is all a "sting" by the editor whereby all ATol's readers will rally and volunteer to pay an annual fee to keep Mr Morris happy.)
Armand De Laurell (Feb 12, '07)

I read with interest that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin says that [US President George W] Bush wants to rule the world, has ignored international law and has made the world a less safe place. Too bad [that] back in October 2004, Putin made [this] statement at the Central Asian cooperation organization in Tajikistan: "Any unbiased observer understands that attacks of international terrorist organizations in Iraq, especially nowadays, are targeted not only and not so much against the international coalition as against President Bush ... International terrorists have set as their goal inflicting the maximum damage to Bush, to prevent his election to a second term. If they succeed in doing that, they will celebrate a victory over America and over the entire anti-terror coalition," Putin said. "In that case, this would give an additional impulse to international terrorists and to their activities, and could lead to the spread of terrorism to other parts of the world." Perhaps he now thinks that would not have been such a bad thing.
Pam B
Hartford, Connecticut (Feb 12, '07)

Spengler responds to readers
Saqib Khan (letter, Feb 7) misapprehends my reference to the Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat, a children's rhyme about mortal combat between two soft toys. It concludes:
Next morning where the two had sat
They found no trace of dog or cat;
And some folks think unto this day
That burglars stole the pair away!
But the truth about the cat and pup
Is this: they ate each other up!
Sunni and Shi'ite power are roughly balanced in the Middle East such that the present conflict might prove the ruin of both sides. I intend no prejudice to Muslims. One might have said the same about France and Germany during World War I, or Catholics and Protestants during the Thirty Years' War, or the English and French during the Hundred Years' War, or Athenians and Spartans during the Peloponnesian War, among many others. Sadly, the Total War in which both sides win (to paraphrase the late Yitzhak Shamir) is a frequent occurrence in history.
Spengler (Feb 9, '07)

Conn Hallinan responds to readers
I was frankly distressed to learn that Asia Times Online has removed my commentary, The Vishnu strategy meets its match (Feb 7) from its website because you received a number of letters suggesting that I was insulting the Hindu religion. I assure you that was not my intention. The title of the commentary came from a remark made by Robert Oppenheimer following the detonation of the first atomic bomb at the Trinity test site in New Mexico. His exact quote (from Richard Rhodes' The Making of the Atomic Bomb, page 676) was: "I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad-Gita: Vishnu is trying to persuade the Prince that he should do his duty and to impress him he takes on his multi-armed form and says, 'Now I am become death, the destroyer of the worlds.' I suppose we all thought that, one way or the other." In researching the quote I found that Oppenheimer had edited it slightly. The most accepted translation is "The Supreme Lord said: I am death, the mighty destroyer of the world, out to destroy" (chapter 11, verse 32). I also found that the speaker is actually Shiva who takes on the form of Vishnu (the reference to Shiva was dropped in the editing process). The concept of "destroyer" is a powerful one, and one that many religions use. One letter writer said that I should have used the Christian Armageddon (I assumed the writer thought I was a Christian; I am not), but Armageddon is not about destruction per se, it is about the great battle that is supposed to be fought in present-day Israel between the forces of Zog and the followers of Jesus. It would supposedly bring on the Second Coming. The suggestion by the letter writer is, I suppose, as casual as my use of the phrase from Oppenheimer. The letter writer is wrong in his use of Armageddon, but I certainly take no offense, and I doubt most Christians would. What I was doing in the commentary was using the words in the context that Oppenheimer used them: What have we done? What have we unleashed upon the world? That is the context that he used it in (he also compared what his team had done to Prometheus). The US, Israel, Britain and some other nations have increasingly resorted to being "mighty destroyers". I also referred to the ability of those nations to unleash mayhem of "biblical proportions." I hope that phrase does not offend Christians, but it is a phrase based on the kinds of destruction the Christian Lord rains down on any number of occasions. I am disturbed that Asia Times Online withdrew my commentary based on the fact that people didn't like it. Isn't the idea of commentaries to provoke discussion? Shouldn't Asia Times Online have printed the letters and let people debate the question? Granted, the focus of my commentary had nothing to do with religion, but still and all, debate is debate. Maybe there are others out there who happen to have a somewhat different view than most the letter writers. How will we know this? If we censor ideas because we fear they may offend someone, why have different ideas? There are certainly Christians who would take offense at one letter writer's casual suggestion of substituting Armageddon, and maybe me using the Bible to describe what the US does in Iraq and Israel in Lebanon. Do we not run such a letter or a commentary because those people might be offended? What article will be withdrawn next? Last, the tone of the letters directed at the commentary and myself is revealing. There is whiff of fundamentalism in them that chills me. Debate, disagreement, even correction are what we should be seeking, not attack and denunciation. The last thing this world needs is more sectarianism. It leads to the very kind of policies I was attempting to challenge.
Conn M Hallinan
Foreign Policy In Focus (Feb 9, '07)

A reader responds to readers
Conn Hallinan has written an essay [The Vishnu strategy meets its match, Feb 7] that, as the editor observed [under Karigar's letter of Feb 7], "made salient points". It deserves to be widely read and pondered. On the other hand, the "Vishnu" analogy was indeed unwarranted, because, for one, as the God who acts (vish), he is guardian of the dharma (the cosmic law) and as such is as much life-bearer as death-bringer; actually, Vishnu is more a force of conservation than anything else, and though that makes him a natural ally of the forces of life, this also implies due destruction, in the same way that any kind of complex life necessitates impermanence and death (without apoptosis and cellular death, pluricellular life would only be a lump of cancerous cells). [Second], Hallinan was pointing to the unfortunate tendency of the English, UStatians and Israelis, for massively destroying any people who stand in their way, often with some sort of religious varnish - accordingly, an "Armageddon" or a "Sodom and Gomorrah" religious analogy would be more fitting, culturally. Considering that these Anglo-Christo-Zionist forces of war and death are still rampaging for even more destruction, articles like Hallinan's are a service to human society. Accordingly, may I suggest to ATol to bring back to their website, properly modified so as to avoid an unnecessary distraction from its main point, an otherwise fine article?
Dr Bittar Gabriel Jivasattha
Switzerland and Australia (Feb 9, '07)

Our original comment was a bit misleading; the article was not deleted but was removed from the Front Page, and is still available on the Middle East Page; the links to it provided above also still work. We agree that the gist of the article made valuable points, but we have learned from hard experience that almost any religious analogy, accurate or otherwise, gets some people in such a froth that there's little point arguing about it. - ATol

In US puzzles over China's military might by Benjamin A Shobert (Feb 9), the author writes, "the ever-present factor in US-China military policy is whether the question of Taiwan's future can be resolved without sparking a conflict between the US and the PLA" [People's Liberation Army]. I believe, on the contrary, that the Taiwan factor barely exists now and would dwindle into irrelevancy within a few decades. The author demonstrates the mental disinclination to accept two obvious and essential features in East Asia. First is China's distinctly enormous size, its projected economic prowess, and the trappings of its history; the other is Taiwan's projected dwindling significance due to the small island's geography, specifically its susceptibility to harassment with little actual force. Hence the tangent of the author's analyses is off and their content needlessly enigmatic. I believe it is obvious that mainland China would continue to deploy increasingly less-subtle economic abrasion on Taiwan, centering on the island's energy vulnerability. In a few decades, Taiwan, in a less and less favorable position, would quite likely be compelled to negotiate for a Hong Kong-like arrangement. It would not be mainland China having to launch an attack on the island, but the island needing to attack the mainland side in order to draw the USA into a conflict, for any realistic chance of eventual independence. How else would Taiwan deal with the increasing economic abrasion from the mainland side with little actual force? The time would come when the mainland side would have accumulated such utterly lopsided advantages that it would easily promulgate uncertainty in energy supply in Taiwan. The PLA's modernization should be considered inevitable simply as the result - restrained for now considering recent history leading to World War II - of the economic rise of an enormous country. Would one suggest that the USA is militarizing for the main purpose of winning in a conflict against Mexico?
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 9, '07)

"As China's development continues, its technological capabilities will need to be weighed against how far it has internalized and how much it understands the accepted standards of international statecraft." I read the above statement from Benjamin A Shobert's piece [US puzzles over China's military might, Feb 9] with a chuckle. Can Mr Shobert tell us if the United States understands the accepted standards of international statecraft?
Francis
Quebec, Canada (Feb 9, '07)

Re Korea nuke talks: Optimism is in the air [Feb 9]: A general air of optimism welcomes the new round of the six-power talks in Beijing. Christopher Hill, the chief American negotiator, seems mildly upbeat that a breakthrough seems imminent on North Korea's nukes. Will champagne corks pop? Every [visitor] from an American non-governmental organization or on a private trip to Pyongyang returns with a rosy reading of things to come of this meeting. Yet a closer look reveals that Washington and Pyongyang are looking at the matter from different standpoints. The United States wants to see progress on the nuclear issue, while North Korea wants the lifting of an embargo of its accounts in Macau and, though it is never mentioned, frozen accounts in Vietnamese banks. Yet if one believes The Financial Times of London, in spite of President [George W] Bush's forceful chokehold on Pyongyang's finances and ability to tap foreign monies and financial sources, it is bruited that Washington, as an inducement, is willing to open negotiations for establishing diplomatic relations with North Korea - which shows the degree of frustration the White House is feeling to find a way to check Pyongyang's nuclear advancement in technology and growing stockpile of weapons. So although a sliver of progress may come about, the fundamental differences remain and grossly abound in contradictions. Nonetheless each side will take comfort in a tactical retreat.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 9, '07)

Dr M A Arona in his article A dangerous continental drift [Feb 8] writes in some sort of a vacuum about Africa, especially when touching on Zimbabwe and Sudan. Are both governments spreading murder and mayhem just for the hell of it, or could there be some other explanation to do with the reality of both situations? When Britain was pushed out of what was then called Southern Rhodesia (later to become Zimbabwe), [it] tried to pervert the course of the first free and democratic elections in 1980 by backing Joshua Nkomo of the pro-British ZAPU [Zimbabwe African People's Union] party. Robert Mugabe's ZANU [Zimbabwe African National Union] party won. Being the more militant, Mugabe asked for white-controlled land to be returned to the new nation. Britain made a promise to buy this land in 20 years' time and return it to Zimbabwe. The year 2000 came and went with the land still in the hands of the white settlers. So Mugabe decided to put into effect the second phase of decolonization - a not very popular move as seen here in Britain, especially when many elite families have huge investments in that land. The ghost of Joshua Nkomo still stalks Zimbabwe as the leader of the Ndebele minority [who] are tribally opposed to Mugabe's Shona majority. Trust Britain to aggravate these tribal differences. So what is the Chinese government to do - buy up the white-owned land and hand it back to the Zimbabwe government? Sudan, another former British colony, has problems not of its own making. If the settled farmers and nomadic graziers go to war over land rights, the Sudanese will have a huge task in bringing both sides together to work out a settlement. And who is this sinister shadowy organization called the Jinjaweed, mentioned by Dr Orona, who are said to be killing, maiming and raping the people of Darfur on the instructions of the Sudanese government? Reminds me somewhat of G A Henty, the 19th-century English colonial writer who wrote The Dash for Khartoum: A Tale of the Nile Expedition. These sinister Sudanese defenders of their country were described as "Fuzzie-Wuzzies" because of the nature of their hair. The Hollywood film industry made a film in 1915 based on Henty's book called The Four Feathers. The UK made a remake of the film in 1921. The US made another remake in 1929. The UK followed up with yet another remake in 1939, on the eve of that World War against totalitarianism. I don't expect China's commercial presence in Sudan is very popular with the former masters of Sudan. So what is the Chinese government to do in Darfur - buy up the farmers' land and give it to the graziers, or maybe buy up the graziers' cattle and goats and hand them to the farmers? Dr Orona quotes US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on the matter of human rights. You cannot be serious! What Dr Orona has written I get every day from the UK media. I go to Asia Times [Online] for a different viewpoint, not a rehash of the old propaganda.
Wilson John Haire
London, England (Feb 9, '07)

To equate the crimes of the ethnic-Arab Jinjaweed, committed against poverty-stricken ethnic Africans of Darfur, to Sudan's anti-colonial struggles of the distant past is a bit of a stretch. There is a political element to the Darfur struggle, and it is true there are separatist forces at work that the Khartoum regime probably has a right to combat. But the genocidal violence of the Jinjaweed, with the tacit approval if not outright support of the Khartoum government, has been unequivocally condemned not only by governments and other players with an ax to grind (and oil to drill), but by trustworthy independent observers. - ATol

Referring to [Dhruba] Adhikary's [Feb 3] article Nepal rioting threatens political transition: A discussion on Nepal's situation with a colleague from Mauritius brings a conclusion that Nepal should really watch out for India's interest in the Himalayan kingdom. Nepal is a country well known for its various ethnic backgrounds. So every ethnic group should contribute in maintaining the stability of the country in its recent progress towards peace. If one group starts to spoil the atmosphere of nationalism, every other group will have an issue that will have to be tackled. This is not the time to disintegrate unless Nepal wants to be part of Indian federation, which has been India's long-term plan. Considering recent developments regarding border security in [the United States of] America and Canada, Nepal's government must also take strong steps in addressing issues relating to its border protection.
Kylie Anthony
Fiji (Feb 9, '07)

In response to David Rhee's letter [of Feb 7, Wei stated [letter, Feb 8] that "the North Koreans (Goguryeo or Koguryo) have more cultural affinity towards China than the South Koreans (Silla in ancient times) do … Whether a future freed North Korea will be happy to associate itself with South Korea remains to be seen." This could not be further from the truth. North Koreans have no more cultural affinity toward the PRC [People's Republic of China] than South Korea does. The bond between North Korea and the PRC is not cultural but political, since both countries are self-proclaimed "socialist" and they have been close allies since the '50s. There is no North-South cultural divide in Korea today that's related to Koguryo-Silla rivalry; after all, Korea had been a unified nation for more than a millennium, first under the Koryo Dynasty and later the Chosun Dynasty, before it was divided into North and South Korea. It would be absurd to assume that North Koreans are descendants of Koguryo while South Koreans can trace their roots back to Silla and Baekje. Kim Il-sung's family is believed to be originally from Chonju, which is located today in North Cholla province, South Korea. The notion that suggests "a future freed North Korea" doing anything (joining the PRC?) but reunifying with South Korea is ridiculous: make no mistake, North Koreans are Koreans first and socialists second, they are a fiercely nationalistic bunch. In North Korea you can see signs that read "Joguktongil manse!" ("Long live the reunification of the motherland") everywhere and occasionally signs in English: "Korea is one!"
Juchechosunmanse
Beijing, China (Feb 9, '07)

I see that you still have semi-pornographic ads for "dating services". I visit a few highly regarded websites, such as [the New York Times], The Times of London, The New Republic etc. Nobody stoops to such a level - at least nobody who expects to keep a high-quality audience. This is my second request for you to eschew such ads - and I cannot help but believe you have other requests. At some point I would be discouraged from visiting your site. I would think that over time, your demographic might maintain numbers but that the quality of your audience would fall. Do you really want to join the "race to the bottom"?
John Morris
Toronto, Ontario (Feb 9, '07)

The publications you mention have huge sales budgets and staff; we do not. However, we have responded to this and similar queries/complaints several times on this page, even going so far as inviting our 100,000 or so daily readers to offer suggestions on how we can finance this site without relying on network ads. We had one response, and it was not from Toronto. - ATol

The article by [Bright B] Simons, [Evans] Larty and [Franklin] Cudjoe [Emperor Hu's new clothes for Africa], and another by [M A] Orona [A dangerous continental drift, both Feb 8], on China's diplomatic moves in Africa bespeak their diligent research which enables them to lecture from the academic pulpit. One wonders what [they would] do if they [were] at the helm of power in Beijing and had to secure vast quantities of oil and gas for domestic consumption. Western powers have secured supply from the Middle East and elsewhere. The same scenario, no rights, no problem, applies. Diplomatic charm is a necessary alternative to invasion and occupation, or direct confrontation with other powers already secured in place.
S P Li (Feb 8, '07)

Chinese President Hu Jintao has come bearing gifts to Africa. [Bright B] Simons, [Evans] Larty and [Franklin] Cudjoe [Emperor Hu's new clothes for Africa, Feb 8] give a good rundown of the good works that China has performed in Africa. Yet China is no stranger to this continent, and you [don't] need to scratch the surface of history [until you encounter] Admiral [Zheng He] (nor bring up the story that Madagascar received a heavy influx of Chinese immigrants). China a half-century ago sought to win friends among the newly decolonized countries in Africa; and during the years of Sino-Soviet rivalry it sought to outmaneuver Moscow for the hearts and minds of the countries in Africa. Beijing sent money, gifts in kind, men and material. Nonetheless, People's China did stub a toe now and then, most notably in siding with Washington and Pretoria and supporting Jonas Savimbi against the MPLA [Movimento Popular de Libertacao de Angola - Partido do Trabalho, or People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola - Party of Labor]. Today as a rapidly developing capitalist economy, with a huge appetite for raw materials and oil and gas that are in abundance in Africa, Beijing has to show a generous hand. Take Nigeria: China has advanced loans and made a commitment to improve that country's railroad infrastructure. Suddenly wire agencies were telegraphing news that a handful of Chinese had been kidnapped. They were released, but at what price? As a country with very healthy foreign reserves, China is in a way a hen in fox country. The African leaders are practiced in extracting bribes, gifts in kind, and projects from which they will take a good cut from the top of the deck. Consequently, Beijing is going to have to learn new rules and dig deeply in its pockets to win the hearts and minds of old and new friends who see in it the goose that is laying golden eggs.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 8, '07)

Gareth Porter's Shi'ite power a law unto itself (Feb 8) is a very informative analysis about the historical background of the alliance between the Bush administration and some Iraqi political groups. I hate to use the sectarian concepts, because they have been promoted by anti-Iraqi groups such as the foreign occupiers. To its credit, the regime of Saddam Hussein had diversified individuals from various Iraqi groups to run the country, a diversity that has become part of the history of Iraq. At any rate I hate to blame the Israelis [for] what has happened in Iraq, because people of various religions have been used by the leisure class in the United States of America to promote the goals of the ruling imperialist class. In this case, the ruling class had decided to occupy Iraq and many other groups had gone to support the project as a central part of the war on terrorism. The Bush administration and no one else [has been] the decision-maker in the country over the last six years. Therefore, this administration is responsible for the decision of sending US troops to occupy Iraq for its wealth of oil, which amounts to 240 billion barrels in reserve. For looting this wealth Iraq has been destroyed; more than 500,000 individuals have been killed; many women have been raped; babies have been murdered; mosques have been abolished; terrorists have been elected to run the Iraqi government, whose head is appointed by President [George W] Bush; schools and hospitals have been ruined; Iraqi civilians have been deported to other countries; and doctors and university professors have been kidnapped and killed. All these destructive achievements, excluding American deaths and wounded people and monetary cost of more than [US]$500 billion, have been called by the Bush administration and neo-conservative pundits enormous success, liberation, building, progress, and democracy within the new Middle East. And other countries in the region must imitate this magnificent Iraq experiment that historians will have to evaluate in the future to determine the legacy of President Bush. That is, this generation does not have full information to evaluate what has been happening in Iraq.
Adil Mouhammed
Illinois, USA (Feb 8, '07)

Wu Zhong in his article Power in China: Through a glass darkly (Feb 7) makes no mention of what happened to the former Soviet Union when Mikhail Gorbachev, then its president, dismantled the state apparatus in 1991 in the name of democratization - criminal gangs proceeded to ransack the state's resources, the social-welfare system was destroyed, and the mass of people found themselves impoverished. You can be sure the Chinese government was watching and noting this tragedy. The Western world was delighted at the outcome. The plight of the person in the street didn't seem to bother them. They saw an opportunity for a financial killing under the cloak of democratization. Witness the democratization of Iraq and Afghanistan today. The Western powers took many centuries to bring about what they now call democracy but it is a democracy under their terms. For example, they were never going to tolerate a communist government in Italy during the early 1950s and made sure their partner the USA had adequate amounts of troops standing by with warships in the Bay of Naples during one vital Italian election. Today in the UK we have three main conservative parties with a tripartisan policy on continuing imperial adventures throughout the world. The US has two major conservative parties who view the rest of the world with suspicion and racial hatred. The notion that the introduction of ageism into the Chinese Communist Party will bring about reform is folly. The Chinese people must be reminded of the more positive aspects of history by their older members and not have Mao Zedong thought of only in terms of the Cultural Revolution by a younger generation. Mao, the bringer of dignity to the Chinese people, experimented in an effort to bring about a new society, as the present leadership of China is experimenting. The West cannot truthfully examine the less pleasant aspects of their history because they haven't finished making more bloody history.
Wilson John Haire
London, England (Feb 8, '07)

It seems that Spengler's The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious [Feb 6] offers the reader [the opportunity] to opine that "Spengler is both hopeless and a serious Zionist".
Armand De Laurell (Feb 8, '07)

I'd like to respond to a few things mentioned in David Rhee's letter [Feb 7]. Rhee claimed that "China has gone so far as to change the name of a sacred Korean mountain from Baekdusan to Changbaishan". First, for his information, the Chinese, including the late Manchus, have been calling Mount Changbai "Changbaishan" for almost a millennium, since the Liao Dynasty (907-1125), a name which literally translates into "perpetually white mountain". As you can see, the Chinese did not change the name recently. The Korean name (South Korean name to be exact), Baekdusan ("white-headed mountain"), was adopted during the Korean Koryo Dynasty (935-1392). I am at a loss as to why the Koreans didn't have a problem with the Chinese calling it "Changbaishan" until now. Rhee might not be aware of the fact that North Koreans call Mount Changbai "Changbaeksan" ("Changbaishan" in Korean), as shown in "Kim Il-sung Changgunui Norae" ("The Song of General Kim Il-sung"). The question is, why does it matter to the South Koreans that the Chinese (and the North Koreans) call a mountain shared by the PRC [People's Republic of China] and North Korea a different name from what it is called by the South Koreans? Why should that even be an issue? This reminds me of the intensive South Korean diplomatic push two years ago forcing the Chinese to change the Chinese name of the South Korean capital city, Seoul, from "Hancheng" to "Shou Er". The name Hancheng was from the Korean name "Hanseong" that Seoul had back in the Chosun Dynasty before the Japanese came. Another example would be the current South Korean effort asking various countries, international organizations and map makers to change the name of the sea between the Korean Peninsula and Japan from the "Sea of Japan" to "Donghae" (East Sea). Apparently the South Koreans won't be satisfied until their names and standards used domestically become universally accepted. Second, Mount Changbai is not just a "sacred Korean mountain". It was considered the legendary birthplace of the imperial family of China's Qing Dynasty, Aisin Gioro. It is a sacred place for the Manchus as well as the Koreans. Rhee went on to say "China and Mr Liu seem to forget that the majority of what is now Jilin province was originally Korean. In fact, the only reason China owns this land now is ... that Japan gave it to them [Chinese] in exchange for the right to build railroads in China during the Japanese occupation of Korea". If Rhee was referring to roughly 1,500 years ago when Koguryo was controlling the territory known as today's northeastern China, then I would have no problem agreeing with him; however, he seemed to be referring to Korea's "lost land" as a result of the Gando Treaty, a claim that cannot be substantiated with any serious historical evidence - then I must disagree with that statement. By the way, one needs to know that the "Gando" area was in no way that big chunk of land, in no way [was] it over "the majority of what is now Jilin province" as Rhee claimed it did. Finally, I don't believe for a second that the unified Korea will "demand that China give a significant chunk of Jilin back", for one simple reason: its preposterous claim involving the Gando Treaty doesn't stand a chance against [scrutiny].
Juchechosunmanse
Beijing, China (Feb 8, '07)

Your letter writer David Rhee [said on Feb 7] that China should not support Korean reunification. I would like to respond to his letter, as he was illogical and untruthful. China is a nation with more than 56 minorities, and [Koreans are] one of them. China has listed many minority-occupied [areas as part of] Chinese cultural heritage because we consider all the minorities Chinese too. The Koguryo (Goguryeo) kingdom overlapped the China-North Korea border. A large part of it is inside modern-day China. China and the Korean Chinese have every right and legitimacy to claim it as our heritage. One should also keep in mind that the North Koreans (Goguryeo or Koguryo) have more cultural affinity towards China than the South Koreans (Silla in ancient times) do. Goguryeo was defeated by the Chinese-Silla alliance army in 668. Whether a future freed North Korea will be happy to associate itself with South Korea remains to be seen. The many Goguryeo-Silla wars should tell something. The notion that a unified Korea [would demand that] China give a significant chunk of Jilin back is laughable. The Koreans' claim to part of Jilin is based on [the fact] that Goguryeo was once the ruler of this land. However, they forgot that Goguryeo seized the land from Han China's commanderies of Lolang, Xiantu, and Liaodong. Should the Chinese demand Jilin back from Goguryeo? I guess we don't have to ...
Wei
Hunan, China (Feb 8, '07)

Criminal justice takes on new meaning when image is more important than substance because it implies that crime does not necessarily need to be solved as long as it can be settled, with closure achieved, and social harmony restored. Of course, actually solving the crime is one way of settling the issue, but if that involves a long and corrosive process, it may seem more sensible to seek a socially acceptable alternative and thereby to balance the value of truth against the social cost of finding it. In that sense, scapegoatism is not seen as an evil thing that only bad cops do, but also as a reasonable thing that good cops do in the service of society. For example, planting evidence to nab the guy who is surely the crook may seem to them expediency around mere technicalities. Once the practice is institutionalized, it can be easily abused by bad cops in malicious ways or for personal gain. Superficial police reform methods imported from the West are not likely to uproot the social underpinnings of scapegoating because they derive from a cultural preference for image over substance.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 8, '07)

[In] How the US Army's being worn down in Iraq [Feb 7], David Isenberg rattles off a laundry list of the sad effects of President [George W] Bush's ill-conceived and failing war in Iraq. It should give us a moment of pause, and much to think of. Our [US] national defenses are being greatly weakened if not destroyed by the pursuit of a war which the single-mindedness of this lame-duck president intends to pursue. Mr Bush's budget that he has sent to Congress is proof positive his war is always spreading the cancer of the spoils system which his Republican administration reinstituted and the huge dispensation for the wealthy and the business community, and the increase of outlays for the military is eating into the health of the ordinary taxpayer by huge cuts to civilian needs. Not only will the future judge his presidency harshly but [it] will hold him responsible for the destruction of the America that we know and of the myth that the United States is a land of opportunity and an exception to failed states of the past.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 7, '07)

This letter is in response to the February 7 article by Henry Liu, The changing South Korean position. Mr Liu makes some pretty bold statements: "The US is the main obstacle to the reunification of Korea and the main obstacle in China's recovery of Taiwan. China, on the other hand, wants the two Koreas to improve relations toward reunification because it believes a unified Korea would greatly reduce regional tension and strengthen stability to allow further economic development." After I read this grossly inaccurate statement, I continued reading in the hope that Mr Liu would somehow modify his comments. To my disbelief, he didn't explain the fact that China is responsible for the continued existence of North Korea. Please recall that Korea would be unified today had Chairman Mao [Zedong] never sent 1 million Chinese soldiers to die in the Korean War. The Chinese suffered more casualties in this war than North Korea and the US combined. Mao lost his own son! The reason? Mao didn't want the United States so close to China, and North Korea provided a convenient buffer for China. That hasn't changed in 50 years. As for South Korea warming up to China, Mr Liu failed to mention the fact that China is actively trying to change ancient northeast Korean history by claiming the ancient kingdom of Koguryo as its own. To put it bluntly, this pisses South Koreans off. Recently, China has gone so far as to change the name of a sacred Korean mountain from Baekdusan to Changbaishan, going so far as the kick out Korean businesses on its side of the mountain in preparation for listing it with UNESCO [the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] as a Chinese cultural heritage site, as if China ever had cultural ties with this mountain. In response, the Korean women's short-track team held up signs while accepting their medals at the Asian Games held in China this year that read, "Baekdusan is our land." The Grand National Party supported the skaters, making the confrontation political. So much for warming up to China. China and Mr Liu seem to forget that the majority of what is now Jilin province was originally Korean. In fact, the only reason China owns this land now is ... that Japan gave it to them [Chinese] in exchange for the right to build railroads in China during the Japanese occupation of Korea. Of course, after the Korean War, who was North Korea to demand the land back when China pretty much saved [it]? Make no mistake, China does not want a unified Korea, unless it is under [its] terms. A unified Korea [would] most likely demand that China give a significant chunk of Jilin back. A unified Korea [would] take away that much-needed distraction that China counts on to keep the Americans busy. Yes, Koreans are learning to love money more and more, and China is a great opportunity for everyone to make money. However, where matters of national identity are concerned, Koreans will not ditch America in favor of China, no matter how much supposed "cultural affinity or economic symbiosis" with China exists.
David Rhee, MD
Los Angeles, California (Feb 7, '07)

Re Conn Hallinan's preposterously titled The Vishnu strategy meets its match [Feb 7]: Words fail me to see such an egregious example of crass and out-of-context analogy between "what we did was insane and monstrous: we covered entire towns in cluster bombs" and the Bhagavad Gita, a text revered even by non-Hindus as explaining Hindu philosophy, in the context of Prince Arjuna compelled to decide, on the battlefield, whether he should fight or flee. All this a part of the story of the millennia-old epic The Mahabharata. It is a text to aid human decision-making, and not for some boasting about who's destroying what, or about some ridiculous "Vishnu strategy". "The latest channeling of the Hindu god" by this author is a pure figment of his overheated imagination, that of a writer groping for a gripping analogy, and coming upon a gross distortion of this kind. He also needs to understand the context in which the well-read [Robert] Oppenheimer made his original remark. I certainly can't accuse this author of having the faintest idea of the Gita, Lord Krishna, his message, or Hindu philosophy. Liberally spraying the incorrect "Krishna = destroyer" reference, and a silly notion of a "Vishnu strategy", did it ever occur to the author to do some research? The analogy adds nothing to his points, anyway. He could have found better analogies closer to home, in the Christian concepts of Armageddon, and evangelical beliefs of Jesus coming back to massacre the "evil ones". Also, I'm appalled that ATimes editors let this past. This kind of blunder is perhaps innocent, but could attract the label of hate speech against Hinduism. [I] hope editors understand the false positions they put loyal Hindu readers [in] by letting in this kind of writing.
Karigar
USA (Feb 7, '07)

We received several letters on this, and the "Vishnu" analogy does seem to have been an unfortunate choice that prevented some readers from getting past the first paragraph (or even the headline) and into the meat of the article, which made salient points. We have taken the article off the website. - ATol

Re The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious [Feb 6]: Spengler tells it like it is, but the ideologues (Marxian, neo-con, et al) can't deal with reality. Recent history may help them appreciate the validity of Spengler's analysis. According to Wikipedia, the longest conventional war of the 20th century was the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, along with 1 million deaths, the "War of the Cities" featuring strategic aerial attacks targeting civilians, documented chemical-warfare attacks by Iraq, signature atrocities such as the use of 12-year-old boys by Iran for "swarm attacks" of Iraqi armor and as "human minesweepers" (these boy-fodder often were given plastic made-in-China keys to paradise to wear from their necks before going out on their suicide missions, and treated to night-before performances by actors dressed in white shrouds riding white horses meant to fool the child-grunts into believing they saw the Mahdi - the Twelver-Shi'a Messiah). According to [Vali] Nasr, The Shia Revival, favorably reviewed by Asia Times Online [Worm in the Sunni apple, Oct 28, '06], the eight-year Iran-Iraq War was really a Shi'a-Sunni fight disguised in national garb. Yet how much Western media coverage was given to that war? Natalie Holloway, a missing blonde from Aruba, received far more in-depth coverage by the American news media. Regarding Round 2 of the Shi'a-Sunni "mother of regional-sectarian wars" - I'll bet most Americans would prefer the participants settle their differences by themselves rather than waste American blood and treasure attempting the fool's errand of stopping Mideast tribal/sectarian/ethnic/religious killing, not to mention idiotic social experiments such as nation-building in barbaric, retrograde societies where age-old blind hatreds and religious zealotry make a mockery of Western standards of civil society. Columnist George Will recently commented that the current American military intervention in Iraq is akin to an outside power intervening during the Battle of Stalingrad. Spengler is saying the same thing, in so many words. Only his all-important gloss is that, unlike Stalingrad, here the world really doesn't care. How sad, too bad. And I really, really mean it.
Richard Greene
USA (Feb 7, '07)

Commenting on the article The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious [Feb 6], I must say that Spengler is hopelessly insane in using tongues of wild animals assuming that we all live in a jungle: "If the Sunnis and Shi'ites of Iraq and Lebanon were to eat each other up like the Gingham Dog and the Calico Cat, and the Palestinians of Gaza were to annihilate one another, the impact on the world would fall below the threshold of observation." And what a perfidious and sadistic observation: the man is simply a psychopath on the loose. In the modern world more than ever before religion is a central, perhaps the central, force that motivates and mobilizes people, in particular in the Islamic world. Spengler should know that the Muslims will always reject and kick out any other ideology except Islam. The Cold War division of humanity is over, and it is the division of humanity in terms of ethnicity, religions and the West's warmongering, greedy imperialism versus the rest of civilization that is responsible for the evil conflicts facing our world. It is sheer hubris to think that because Soviet communism has collapsed, the West has won the world for all time and that Muslims are going to rush to embrace Western civilization and its lewdness as the only alternative. The Americans should be aware that sooner or later Arab Sunnis and Shi'as in Iraq and Lebanon will unite together and will annihilate American soldiers until none is seen on the Iraqi streets ...
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 7, '07)

Is it possible that Spengler is just an invention of the editors at ATimes? One is starting to think so. I've been duped, I know I have. This latest bit of madness [The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious, Feb 6] from the pen of the (supposed) Herr Spengler is simply so irrational as to be some kind of PR provocation. I would like to challenge Spengler to a debate. I'd be happy to do this - if he really exists, and I'm starting to doubt it. To neglect the history of colonialism and US foreign policy as he charts out his "blame the victims" analysis is the kind of cloud cuckoo-land stuff that even The Weekly Standard would reject. So how is it ATimes accepts this vomit? He is a racist and a clown (an example is to think the world a safer place because of insurance policies: does it occur to Spengler that, oh, the people of the DRC [Democratic Republic of Congo] might not be able to afford insurance policies?) and doesn't deserve the cyber-ink granted him at an otherwise quite good online publication. If Spengler really exists (and actually I hope he doesn't), then let him engage in debate - and if not with me, then with someone - because he needs to be revealed for what he is: a deeply bigoted and reactionary loon.
John Steppling
Lodz, Poland (Feb 7, '07)

I wish to protest at your "print this article" [button] - it doesn't, it prints only one page. This means that one is afflicted by multiple versions of your ads. My students are quickly turned off this arrangement when I suggest that they use Asia Times Online as source material for research projects - they object to printing out so much irrelevant material. Consequently they choose other source materials and so they do not get to read your ads - any of them. Pity about that!
Doug Johnston (Feb 7, '07)

Especially for educational use, we suggest that readers do not use the "print article" feature but instead copy and paste the material they want into a word-processing program. That way your students can easily store the material on a computer disk or hard drive for future use, and/or even refrain from printing it out at all, thereby saving your school expensive printer ink while helping to save the world's forests at the same time. - ATol

Spengler's The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious (Feb 6) is as usual informative reporting with problematic propositions. First, Spengler thinks that the situation in Iraq, Lebanon, and Palestine would not be a matter of material importance for anyone else, but the empirical facts suggest otherwise. The conflict in the Middle East has created huge profits for monopoly capitalism, particularly for oil corporations and the world military complex. For example, ExxonMobil has made about [US]$40 billion during 2006. Without the occupation of Iraq and threat to bomb Iran, oil corporations would not have made such huge profitability over the last four years. The arms race has been on the rise and many countries, from the United States of America to North Korea, have been exporting arms for profits. The US has been spending more than $500 billion on [its] military, which has greased the wheels of the military complex significantly. Without such expenditures the American financiers are in a deep recession, which generates world stagnation. Second, Spengler thinks that the basic world conflict is between Arabs and Jews who seek a way in the modern world and Arabs and Persians who reject the modern world. With all respect, there is no such modern world in the Middle East. The conditions of these countries have been in their worst shape ever. Modernity must entail freedom and peace rather than war and hegemony. In other words, the basic world conflict is actually between the elite leisure imperialist class seeking hegemony and profitability and the underlying population seeking liberation and peace. This conflict can only be solved if world monopoly capitalism is transformed to a new democratic system.
Adil Mouhammed
Illinois, USA (Feb 6, '07)

I think Spengler's got a point with The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious (Feb 6). It is an interesting take on the Middle East situation, and the only fly in the ointment I see is the future actions of the Western powers, especially the US. The situation there is volatile. The answers, unfortunately, are not readily made clear. There are many players, so there is a tense state of flux. Caution and deliberation have to be the West's [standard operating procedure] with flexibility to address a rapidly changing situation. It is easy for the Middle East to turn into a Western quagmire or worse. Hence all options have to be carefully weighed before jumping in or pulling out. At this point one can only hope for the best.
Jack Meehan
New Hampshire, USA (Feb 6, '07)

The bitter fact that many people like Spengler are unable to digest is that the main problems of the Middle East, including Iraq, are those created by great powers [The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious, Feb 6]. Yeah, you are right, the world economy is healthy and stable, but at what cost? The answer is obvious: containing the Middle East, killing innocent people, bombing its markets, and the systematic genocide by the United States and its local and foreign allies in the region. Isn't it right that without Middle East oil the whole [of] your so-called stable and healthy world economy will collapse in a short while? So keep killing and destroying because our prosperity is in their misery.
Shiri
Tokyo, Japan (Feb 6, '07)

Re The Middle East is hopeless, but not serious [Feb 6]: I'm glad to read that pseudo-Spengler thinks that "human tragedy never is a good thing"; I've gotten quite a different impression from his writings over the years.
Lester Ness
Kunming, China (Feb 6, '07)

Kent Ewing may be right in everything that he wrote about Kim Jong-nam [North Korean heir gambles with his future, Feb 6]. Yet he may have missed the point. High liver and high roller that he may be, he is after all his father's son and may be about his father's business. As Ewing points out, Macau is where Banco Delta Asia's vaults house North Korea's frozen deposits of US$24 million. If, as the pundits predict, there is a breakthrough at the six-power talks, judging from the signs read after the ... talks in Berlin, Washington may be willing to unfreeze half of that amount. And who better to take possession of that but the Dear Leader's son?
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 6, '07)

The North Korean people, maybe? - ATol

In US-China: A turn for the worse by Benjamin A Shobert (Feb 6), the author repeats the trite presumption that the realistic US objective, in its China policy, is a "break in the power of the one-party system". This presumption is too specific, too limited, and also too unrealistic. Rather, economic integration of the PRC [People's Republic of China] with the rest of the world promotes broad-based enhancement of public expectation of quality of life in China. Such integration also promotes a strong disincentive to actually use brute force on Taiwan. Mainland China now sees reunification with Taiwan in terms of threat without execution, more and more upon the background of developing overwhelming advantages in all fields that culminate in peaceful coercion. I don't believe that "everyone assumes that the Chinese political system is going to open up" in the American way. Last, should one be so naive as to completely disregard pure American economic incentives in economic integration with the PRC?
Jeff Church
USA (Feb 6, '07)

[Iranian President Mahmud] Ahmadinejad came to power in 2005 promising to use oil money to cut the gap between the rich and [poor], but both groups are struggling to come to terms with his rhetoric and make their ends meet [see Ahmadinejad held hostage to bazaar politics, Feb 3]. If he had studied [the] American democratic process, he would have picked up the lesson that [George H W] Bush [taught] Bill Clinton in 1992, "It's the economy, stupid." The problem as always is [that] under these situations [Iran's] economy is under intense pressure because of its nuclear ambitions and ambiguous involvement in Iraq. Had he [Ahmadinejad] fixed the economy, his critics, who are increasing in numbers each day, might have had more patience and stomach for his political adventurism, nuclear brinkmanship and rhetoric on wiping Israel from the world map. Though the working classes and the poor are right behind him demonizing the USA led by "Shitan", George W Bush, and blaming him for all the evils confronting them, inflation and unemployment are running at 30%, [and] rents and property prices are 40% higher than six months ago, which made 150 Iranian parliamentarians sign a letter blaming Ahmadinejad for the country's ills, and accusing him of squandering and planning to squander the country's oil earnings making 80% of its revenue in the coming budget. People are under pressure and struggling to meet daily necessities, and prices of simple edibles like tomatoes, onions, flour and sugar are daily going up. He is even planning to introduce [gasoline] rationing at the Iranian new year. Ahmadinejad is an ascetic, lives in a small flat, drives an old car, washes his own dishes and believes that the Iranians should be frugal and reduce their dependence on Western goods, [and] shun and abandon their lewd morality. He is very shrewd, calculating to the last denominator and extremely intelligent but subtly different: a mixture of apocalyptic piety and politics. He may welcome an attack by the USA and justify a retaliatory strike against Israel with the nuclear weapons acquired from the former Soviet Union and proclaim [instantaneously the] hidden Mahdi in the Muslim world. A joke I heard about President [Hamid] Karzai when asked how would he get rid of unemployment; very simple, he said, "We will get rid of the unemployed." So perhaps Ahmadinejad will send all his unemployed and young to the battle front to fight against the Shitan-e-Azam, the USA, with a dual purpose in mind: martyrdom and getting rid of unemployment.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 6, '07)

I read with profound interest the article by Dhruba Adhikary Nepal rioting threatens political transition (Feb 3). It is unquestionably a factual presentation of what is going on in one of the insurgency-ravaged countries of the region. However, Adhikary seems to have shown some degree of reluctance to be unambiguously explicit in his analysis as to which force is behind the despicable political turmoil. As Adhikary has vaguely pointed out, the region of the southern plains of Nepal is not a neglected part of the country, politically, economically, [or] from the standpoint of infrastructure development. It is simply because the so-called "champions" of the Madhesi cause, who are incidentally immigrants from the adjoining states of India, are getting tacit support from the Indian establishment, be it the [former] Bharatiya Janata Party-led government or the Indian National Congress. An objective study would reveal that the Terai has the maximum number of industries, irrigation facilities, agricultural establishments, roads network, and forest resources, whereas the remote mountainous part of the country is relatively devoid of these opportunities. Hence the Madhesis' claims are out and out unjustifiable. The seeds of the current agitation of Terai people were sown by the Nepali version of the Bolshevik revolutionaries called Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) as early as 1996 when they started indiscriminately organizing "liberation fronts" as part of their strategy to expand the so-called "People's War". These liberation fronts were mostly based on individual ethnicity. But now it has gone out of their control. It is rather a premonition of the impending disaster, ie, Nepal's possible disintegration, whose ultimate beneficiary will be none other than its nuclear neighbor to the south. The major political parties of Nepal are today taking recourse to their habitual escape hatch that the unrest has regressive forces behind it. In fact it is not the regressive forces that are fomenting the unrest, it is India that is playing a detestable game in Nepal with the help of a few quislings.
Sadananda Mishra
Kathmandu, Nepal (Feb 5, '07)

Re [Jim] Lobe's Lawmakers move to restrain Bush on Iraq (Feb 3): Americans may not realize it, but this could be a last-ditch effort to stop cataclysmic events from happening - a regional Middle East war, another [September 11, 2001]-type attack, [George W] Bush-declared martial law. The potentials are all there. To some it may sound like a bit of histrionics, but the Bush administration is pushing risk-taking beyond the envelope. On many realms it has taken the whole world over the edge for the sake of an inflexible ideology and an intoxication wrought by unchallenged power. It has [jeopardized] and is jeopardizing peace, sacrificing the global environment and causing world unrest with its inane, irresponsible policies. While Asia Times [Online] has provided insightful reporting and a forum for thoughtful people, the American media [have] failed miserably on both fronts. Recently in Asia Times [Online], articles by [Kaveh L] Afrasiabi, [Gareth] Porter and [Pepe] Escobar have provided balanced information on Middle East events and the real dangers that are lurking. The point is that the Bush administration's surge in Iraq must be stopped, and it is clear now that it will take a concerted effort by the American people and responsible elected representatives. It's not just a surge in Iraq troops. I am convinced that it is tied to controlling the whole Middle East, including attacking Iran. And far from deterring al-Qaeda, it may even spur a massive suicide-type response from them. World opinion has realized the error of Bush's ways for some time. Now the American people and the American media must catch up.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Feb 5, '07)

Zhou Jiangong's article on China's plans to shift some reserve funds is fascinating and well written [China aims to spend $200bn of reserves, Feb 3]. Thank you.
Harald Hardrada
Chapel Hill, North Carolina

Re North Korea: Something might just happen [Feb 3]: Pyongyang after testing a nuclear device some months ago had a rude awakening by the intense pressure Beijing brought to bear on it. It has learned a sad lesson. An attentive student, it has reshuffled its hand on will it or won't it return to the six-power talks. And so we see North Korea's chief negotiator to the talks, Kim Kye-gwan, invited his Foggy Bottom [US State Department] counterpart Christopher Hill for talks in Berlin with the objective of jump-starting the stalled six-power talks. The reconvened talks ended as they always do, in a statement, notwithstanding guarded optimism held in the corridors of power ... Is there reason anew for optimism for a breakthrough on the nuclear issue? The pundits have mixed reviews on the issue. [Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies Professor] Donald Oberdorfer is sure something will happen (he does have a pipeline to Pyongyang through his friend Donald Gregg of the Korea Society, so he may know something we do not); [Georgetown University's] David Steinberg has a less rosy view. And former South Korean foreign minister Han Sung-joo has a standpoint which sees stalemate in competition between Seoul and Washington for Pyongyang's ear. The Financial Times' Anna Fifield and Guy Dinsmore quote [assistant] secretary Hill as saying there is hope for improvement, since the leadership in Pyongyang is divided ... on the talks, which is not saying much, the more especially since the Bush administration has not a clue as to what is really going on in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea [DPRK]. (Remember what the pundits said of a divided leadership in Tehran. And look at the reality today in its standoff with the Bush administration.) It looks as though Pyongyang is giving mixed signals to confuse Washington. And even if there is some "progress" in the talks, [US President George W] Bush's administration refuses publicly to let up its intractable position when it comes to North Korea. If anything, despite reports in the press, it is not acting quickly enough to thaw the DPRK's blocked accounts in Macau or Vietnam or elsewhere. Has Washington learned that "good cop, bad cop" doesn't work well with [North Korean leader] Kim Jong-il?
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 5, '07)

Re Why Nemesis is at the US's door [Feb 1]: Assume, just for the sake of argument, that Richard Bruce Cheney is not delusional when he speaks of "great successes" in Iraq, but rather, from the viewpoint of his own interests, at times too candid for comfort: the goal of the invasion was to destroy Iraq in such a way that the country could hardly rise again for a generation, if ever, and that goal has been achieved with a vengeance. And indeed, the spill-over effect that the present US administration predicted for other countries or areas in Southwest Asia is also in the process of being fulfilled - certainly not with regard to "democracy", but only the most naive could have given that line any credence - but rather with regard to all-out civil war, eg, between Hamas and Fatah in occupied Palestine, and between the various groups in the Lebanon. So Mr Cheney is not entirely wrong to claim the credit that is due him for his policies. And to turn to Professor [Chalmers] Johnson's prophecies (with which I tend to agree), if, when creditors are finally forced by their own untenable position to foreclose the mortgage and take the farm, and people in the US (and we in Europe as well) are compelled to work for wages and under conditions not too dissimilar from those presently obtaining in the sweatshops of Guangdong, Messrs [George W] Bush and Cheney or their successors - and their bagmen - will cry all the way to the bank in the massive transfer of wealth from what was once called a "middle class" to the super-rich. Capital has no country, and just as it has been extremely profitable this last quarter-century to invest it in a China, in which labor enjoys little protection from extreme exploitation, it will become profitable to invest in the United States when conditions there have been "adjusted" to the Chinese norm. But who is going to purchase the goods?
M Henri Day, PhD, MD
Stockholm, Sweden (Feb 5, '07)

Asia Times [Online] is by far the best newspaper I know - globally. Most outstanding and in the best sense of what journalism should provide to society (and civilization), you are the benchmark most other publications could not even aspire to. Thanks for making all those excellent articles available on the 'Net for us to enjoy overseas.
M Frey
Switzerland (Feb 5, '07)

With regard to the forecast that global warming will increase the Earth's surface temperature by 4 degrees [Celsius] in 100 years, I would like to commend the bozos who get their short-term weather forecasts wrong about half the time and whose forecast for the 2006 hurricane season never materialized for finally selecting a forecast horizon sufficiently long to ensure that they will be dead before they are ever proved wrong again.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 5, '07)

Re India's Tata takes on the world [Feb 2]: Common wisdom is putting money on the rise of China. It has taken little notice of India. Tata's US$11.3 billion takeover of Corus has brought world attention to India. If China needs a model to follow on its path to full-fledged capitalism, Tata and Mittal would serve it well as examples. Tata and Mittal have taken on the world of steel, but they are complete vertically integrated companies that know how to do business successfully. The flood of private investment capital would reap better profits in India, and have access to a skilled workforce of brain and brawn. Corruption is less a monkey on the back of the Indian subcontinent, and the rule of law prevails, as well as wider use of English.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 2, '07)

Re One thing China can't offer Africa [Feb 1] by Bright B Simons, Evans Lartey and Franklin Cudjoe: China does not need the West, which has collectively brutalized it and Africa with its big guns, to lecture it on what it can or cannot offer Africa. To China and Africa, this article is just like "a tale told by (three self-styled wise men), full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".
JM (Feb 2, '07)

There is no lecturing here. The article is an analysis of what's what. We have absolutely no problem with African nations deciding to saddle themselves with Chinese-style military-industrial complexes if that's what they want. - ATol

With regard to whether the honeymoon is over for the CNS [Council for National Security] in Thailand, I would like to note that honeymoon or no, one might wish to consider that without the regime change the slew of flaws with the new [Bangkok] airport that are now emerging would have resulted not in investigation, corrective action, and charges of malfeasance but in charges of criminal defamation and billions in defamation lawsuits. How soon we forget.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Feb 2, '07)

Those who have forgotten might like to reread Pepe Escobar's An appeal to the Thai masses (Nov 29, '05). The battle for freedom of expression is evidently not over; according to the campaign group Freedom Against Censorship Thailand, the number of websites blocked by the Thai government since the September coup had increased by 500% as of January. - ATol

I just read your comments to my letter of January 31, and would like to go on record and attest that I am unequivocally supportive of exploring alternative ways to improve ATol's revenues. So if it takes so-called "sexy" seductions, I say bring it on. If it's not too late to suggest additional ways to improve revenue, it may be opportune to consider charging Spengler's forum and adherent participants of same a yearly membership. Last, if anyone is detracted from the caliber and professionalism of the world-wide contributors that ATol has continuously provided its readers by a few so-called "sexy" pics, there's a slangy Russian/American expression that may be applicable as a response.
Armand De Laurell (Feb 2, '07)

Bring it on. - ATol

Is it true that Russia will attack the US fleet in the [Persian] Gulf if the US fleet attacks Iran? There is some kind of secret agreement, I heard.
Dennis Wier
Switzerland (Feb 2, '07)

Heard the one about Washington's secret agreement with Beijing for China to attack Russia? So many "secrets" ... - ATol

It's 1:30pm Wednesday, January 31, and I've just gotten off the Staten Island ferry to take the Brooklyn-bound R [line of the New York subway system]. The subway's closed, streets are blocked off, police cars everywhere. Oh God no! It can't ... Then I remember [US President George W] Bush is in town. All right, I'll walk up a few blocks to the A. Beautiful day, happy to be alive in New York City, I love my job. Perfect time in life for a giant Snickers bar. I hand a buck and a quarter [US$1.25] to the newsstand guy. The thing's still frozen. Usually I have no patience and break the frozen candy with my teeth. However, tens of thousands of dollars in recent dental bills for caps, crowns, bridges and God knows what else remind me vaguely of the Buddhist concept of slowly savoring each morsel. This is exactly what I'm doing as 30 or 40 police motorcycles roar by. There he is, passing before my eyes on Broad Street. Even through the tinted glass I can see the smarmy A E Newmanesque "What me worry?" smirk. Instinctively I stick out the middle finger of both hands and stand there quietly moving my arms up and down. Now some of us spend entire lifetimes searching for, and perhaps never finding, that perfect moment. Well, all I can tell you is the taste of that slowly dissolving chocolate, the caramel, nuts and nougat, the sun shining down through the canyons, the half-completed Times crossword under my arm and my absolute freedom to express my total contempt and disdain toward the leader of the free world ... God, I love this country.
Bill Bartlett
Brooklyn, New York (Feb 2, '07)

One of my very few heroes died [on Jan 31]. Molly Ivins was a very smart and articulate writer and columnist here in the USA. Her political views and comments cut through all of the bullshit with wit and humor. She attained the top class of her chosen profession while losing none of the down-home candor and style of a real country girl. What a great lady she was! I shall miss her.
Ken Moreau
New Orleans, Louisiana (Feb 2, '07)

Newspaper columnist Molly Ivins, 62, died in Austin, Texas, of cancer, with which she was first diagnosed in 1999. She was a frequent critic of the administration of President George W Bush, who reportedly said in a statement after her death: "I respected her convictions, her passionate belief in the power of words, and her ability to turn a phrase. She fought her illness with that same passion. Her quick wit and commitment to her beliefs will be missed." - ATol

The gist of the article One thing China can't offer Africa [Feb 1] is that China's model of military-industrial complex (MIC) is not one to be copied. Why would a country want a strong MIC? Especially in Africa! Africa needs many things, but not more military or arms efficiency. An excessively powerful MIC leads to militarism and wars of aggression (see the USA). The US MIC is not nearly as efficient as generally thought. Redundant programs with unlimited funds make the US MIC productive but not efficient. The MIC deplores efficiency because there is less graft, corruption, and money to be made. One example is the US Navy's LPD-17 (a destroyer-class modern attack warship) program. Its cost overruns are in the billions [of US dollars] and the first two of these ships have been nine years in construction, and are still at the construction docks in plain view from the levee near my home. At least the MICs of China and France have been contained for the last few decades by their respective governments and not unleashed on the world. To be critical of China's efforts at high-tech weapons systems is the realm of armchair warriors. We have way too many of those in this world.
Ken Moreau
New Orleans, Louisiana (Feb 1, '07)

Re One thing China can't offer Africa [Feb 1]: China is a weapons manufacturer. It is looking to increase market share, and Africa is a prize plum. Yet when it comes to men and arms, Africa has nothing to learn from China on that score. Had a Beijing scholar searched deep in the stacks of musty libraries, he might have come across the seminal works of University of Chicago sociologist Morris Janowitz on the role of military elites in Africa. He would find tips how to wean metals- and mineral-rich Africa from the ties that bind it to former colonial and neo-colonial masters. For the moment, China has much to learn about the arms trade and race.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Feb 1, '07)

Syed Saleem Shahzad: I found your article [The Taliban's flower power, Feb 1] very interesting. However, I find it hard to believe that an organization like the Taliban would indulge in such nefarious activities [as] drug smuggling and contraband protection. As a deep-seated Islamic organization, it's unlikely that they would commit such transgressions. As much as I detest their totalitarianism, I must concede that when they were in power, there were some benefits such as restoration of law and order in the country as well as the stoppage or drastic reduction of poppy cultivation. The same can be seen even in Somalia, where the Islamists ended the tyrannies of various warlords and restored some law and order in the areas [they] controlled. Perhaps the Taliban are being forced into such activities because of the drying up of funds, as a result of stronger international money-laundering laws. If this is true, it goes without saying that their organization is now as corrupted as any other political organization anywhere else in the world. And that, along with several of their other beliefs, is flawed, at least in the 21st century.
Ramesh Brahmadathan (Feb 1, '07)

What I gather is that Taliban are not directly involved in the drug trade, but rather turn a blind eye to it in their areas and get financial benefits in the form of monetary contributions from drug traders. - Syed Saleem Shahzad

Commenting on the article Admit it - you really hate modern art [Jan 30]: "'I don't know much about art,' you aver, 'but I know what I like.'" I agree with Spengler on this. Yes, it is true what you like is a subjective phenomenon and not objective. Something that I would find esthetic and love … could easily be an eyesore for many. Personally, I shun modern art and often get lost in its message. But there is no denying the fact that [things] of beauty, if in the lovely shape of a pretty woman walking on a street or a beautiful painting hanging on a wall, are indeed things of joy forever depending on the subjectivity of a mind. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, which reminded me of one of the greatest love stories of Laila and Majnoon in The Arabian Nights. Majnoon was a handsome prince who fell deeply in love with a poor girl of very ordinary looks and of darkish complexion. He could not live without her and lost [interest in everything else in] life, and wandered around in a daze for his love. The king was annoyed and on his orders, Laila was arrested and brought before a qazi (judge) who accused her of misleading and misguiding the prince into bewilderment, and said to her in Persian, "Az deegar khoobaan, thoo afzoon neesti," meaning, "Oh girl, you are so plain-looking and there are girls out there exquisitely beautiful. What magic have you played on Majnoon that he has lost his mind and existence for you?" Laila replied to the judge, "Sir, you would not not understand, deedea Majnoon ger boode tura, herr doo alam beykhtar boode tura," meaning, "If you look at me with the eyes of Majnoon, you will find the answer." It is true that our eyes sometimes tell us something that is unexplainable or undescribable in written or spoken words.
Saqib Khan
UK (Feb 1, '07)

I would question [letter writer] Salt's January 30 English comprehension of my letter of January 29. Nowhere did I endorse or praise the current state of affairs in China. Note the words, "all kinds of inequities", "the control of media", "dirty linen" etc. Salt mentioned the world's largest democracy, India. A country is not democratic simply because it proclaims itself to be. Read the long, front-page article in the Los Angeles Times (Jan 29) on the two systems of justice in India, one for the rich and one for the poor. Elsewhere there are more sophisticated democracies with corruption legalized through campaign donation, lobbying, and election laws. Should these systems be scrapped? Certainly not. Slow but continuous improvement would come to pass. It is obvious that China, unlike India, [which] learned from its former English masters, is groping its way to evolve a system that its leaders find prudent and manageable, in view of present necessities. My main point is to answer [Kent] Ewing's comment on China's historical attitude toward Japan [In China all history is political, Jan 26]. True apology is effected by deeds, not by lips.
S P Li

Answering the question of Juchechosunmanse [letter, Jan 31], the reason we don't see "Cuba threat" is because Havana doesn't fire satellite killers as China does, for instance. As I wrote before, "China threat" does not emanate from a single event, but from a set of Beijing-twisted actions that lie in its non-democratic nature. Surely, we should be very concerned when the US disregards International community opinion, but an important difference between the US and China is that American people are able to correct [their] own way while walking, deciding what is right and what is wrong, as they showed when [they withdrew] from Vietnam, when [president Richard] Nixon was sacked, when they decided not to support the Bush administration, and so on. [On the other hand], Chinese people do not have much choice but to accept Beijing's authoritarianism, whether good, fair, right, or a complete disaster for Chinese and other people ... Would Chinese have supported [their] government in the Cultural Revolution, or in the Tiananmen massacre, if they were free enough? Or would they support the military threats against Taiwan people? Probably not, otherwise it would be really a scary thing.
M Murata (Feb 1, '07)

I am a frequent visitor of ATol. I am disturbed, however, by the recent appearance of tawdry, near-pornographic ads for "dating" and such - which are picking up my IP address and being customized to my own area. I could not continue reading ATol articles with my family present. If this continues, I will lose my motivation to visit your site, which otherwise is quite interesting.
John Morris
Toronto, Ontario (Feb 1, '07)

Interesting enough to pay for? That's the only alternative to advertising, and as we've said previously, although "sexy" ads attract a handful of complaints (no one is going to write a letter saying, "Hey, love those sexy babes on your site - hubba hubba!"), they also attract a lot of clicks, and that's what pays the bills. - ATol

No doubt, complacency leads to arrogance, and precisely that has happened to core Indian English media, which trumpet that India is the largest democracy and other nations, including its neighbors, should learn from it a few lessons on democracy. It joins the world to paint the Muslims as uncivilized terrorists, but others in India are the innocent suffers. When the otherwise anti-Islamic global media reported about the demonstrations by Labour MPs [members of Parliament] in front of the Indian High Commission in London pressing the Indian government to save the life of Afzal Guru, sentenced to death (on the basis of "evidence" supplied by Indian government agencies). After [they] cleverly implicated him in the Indian Parliament attack, the India English print media, by and large, tried to hide the news about the demonstrations. It is amazing that while the core Indian press is quick to report, preferably as boxed items, if anything is written in the USA or UK against Islam and Muslims, the truth about the positive side of the Muslims and Islam, even when presented in the Western media, it deliberately ignores. Can one ask the learned Indian editors if the continued, arrogant anti-Muslim format of journalism being used and practiced in India is worth the trouble even when "general killings" go on unchecked in many parts of the country?
Dr Abdul Ruff Colachal
New Delhi, India (Feb 1, '07)

January Letters

Head Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East, Central, Hong Kong
Thailand Bureau: 11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110