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.

April 2007

Re In the trenches of the new cold war [Apr 28] by M K Bhadrakumar: As [American comedian and satirist] Stephen Colbert would put it, this article is "all facts and no heart". Or all knowledge and no fun. In fact, the whole analysis is so barren of any ideological and propagandistic value, it could never find its way into mainstream Western media. There are plenty of explanations as to why, with the most innocent as follows. Civilizations in decline, it was noted, develop a culture of escapism, and Western civilization is undoubtedly experiencing relative decline. All charts confirm that. Sure, its descent has commenced from an extremely high base, and being thus far rather gradual, it still affords the West significant advantages. But the writing is on a wall, and the 21st is shaping up as not exactly a New American Century. So far it's a Century of Eurasia, and there is something cruelly ironic that its emergence was fertilized by the ashes of PNAC [Project for the New American Century] fantasies, designed to prevent it. Confronted with such an abrupt and unexpected change, boxed-in Western consumer demands and gets an endless supply of sedative reporting based on hype, wishful thinking and outright lies. The truth is a niche product today. Since Russia is a quintessentially Eurasian nation, this century belongs to it too. All rhetoric aside, Russia can't be contained because it seeks no expansion, only security and prosperity. And its progress cannot be derailed without inflicting unacceptable costs on those who wish to obstruct it. Some people believe the Cold War never ended, but if we accept the notion of a "new cold war", then Russia's historical record should serve as a sobering warning. Time after time, Russia tends to ... lose the first encounter, rarely the second and never the last one. There will be no "cakewalks". Not here.
Oleg Beliakovich
Seattle, Washington (Apr 30, '07)

I would like to commend Henry C K Liu's Part 1 of China and Appeasement [Beyond Munich: Geostrategy and betrayal, Apr 28] for its clear elucidation of the main features of US policy towards China over the last few decades. That said, there are a few points I disagree with. As a preliminary matter, it is incorrect to state that the US president is commander-in-chief in foreign policy. He is commander-in-chief of the armed forces in a time of war as declared by Congress. That this element of the US constitution has been progressively drained of its applicatory power does not change its constitutional status. More substantially, Henry C K Liu writes of neo-liberal reform projects in China as part of the US strategy of enfeebling the country (now that a strong China to balance the USSR is no longer needed). He writes that the CCP's [Chinese Communist Party's] legitimacy depends on the continued support of the peasantry. True, but how well has socialism really served the Chinese peasantry? It is precisely the lack of legal redress in the face of abuse by the official organs that is the cause of most of the contemporary peasant unrest. This is not unique to the period after capitalist reforms. Professor Jonathan Spence in his book In Search of Modern China has stated that complaints about abuse of power by CCP cadres began as early as the 1950s, and provided much popular anger that facilitated the later Cultural Revolution (leading to further abuses, but that's another story). The CCP leadership still seems to depend on the central government to correct abuses at the lower levels, just as every reforming emperor seemed to hope that his emissaries would reign in rapacious officials. But China is enormous. There is no way that Beijing [will] succeed in such a task. The central government seems to only have responded to peasant unrest, environmental damage, and the like when concerned citizens, at great risk to themselves, have managed to raise enough of a fuss. While the foreign funding and the upper leadership of NGOs [non-governmental organizations] ought to be scrutinized, the law must provide that concerned citizens be able to voice grievances and seek redress without undue fear of official retaliation. In other words, some manner of local and regional democratic accountability is needed. If that is what Henry C K Liu means by socialism, that is only the Confucian axiom of renmingweizu with modern science and technology, then I support his view. But if it means socialism as it has already existed in 20th-century China, then would it not be a disaster?
Jonathan X (Apr 30, '07)

Part 2 of Henry C K Liu's China and Appeasement series, Not much rise, and even less peace , is now online. - ATol

Re Little to cheer on Afghan anniversary (Apr 28): James Emery makes some good points, [but] I would like to point out some flaws. First he says, "Opposition to the Marxist government [of Afghanistan] was swift and widespread." Not quite accurate. It hit the fan when the Afghan Marxist government decreed that females [would] be educated. Second, he says, "The US must pressure President General Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan to begin closing the most radical madrassas." Musharraf has made efforts in this area, which so far have failed. It may even backfire on him, so he does not have the free hand the West thinks he has, even from within his own government. Third, he says, "The US should insist that Saudi Arabia quit funding them" (the madrassas). [President George W] Bush and company are in bed with the Saudi leadership. They are funding the same in the US with impunity, so don't expect to see this from Bush. Only if it bites the Saudis in the butt (which it may) will this change. The last point I would bring out is that Mr Emery says Musharraf must be encouraged to attack all of the Taliban strongholds and sanctuaries in Pakistan. Agreed but this is easier said than done. This area has been virtually off-limits to governments since the British were in control of what was India at the time. It is treacherous terrain and the natives are fierce fighters who know every nook and cranny. Having said that, let me say the article is otherwise well written and on target. Mr Emery certainly has a good overview of the situation and does raise many valid points.
Jack Meehan
Moultonborough, New Hampshire (Apr 30, '07)

Re Saqib Khan's letter [Apr 27] on Spengler's article Tolkien's Christianity and the pagan tragedy [Apr 24]: Judging by Saqib's letter, the West must be evil indeed and the Westerners must be nothing but bloodthirsty, gun-toting savages, hell-bent on destruction of poor Muslims. But then I would like to ask the obvious question: If the West is so bad, what exactly is Saqib, along with millions of other Muslims, doing there?
Constantine
Canada (Apr 30, '07)

Re The Middle East road to impeachment [Apr 27]: The impeachment of [US Vice President Richard] Cheney is the first priority even though [President George W] Bush is also culpable; for we do not want to remove Bush, resulting in a Cheney succession to the presidency. Years ago, I would have doubted that an administration could commit so many abuses of power, tell so many blatant lies, cause so many unnecessary deaths, and harm so many people without being at least removed from office. That the opposition party still balks at removing the worst perpetrator, the malevolent Cheney, strains credulity. I would usually say that impeachment proceedings are too disruptive and divisive, even though this didn't stop the anti-[president Bill] Clinton elements. In the time that remains in the Bush term, much damage can be done, so it would be wise to weaken and remove the would-be despots before the worst happens.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Apr 27, '07)

Andrew Forbes makes questionable use of the Southern Sung watchword "lips to teeth" in describing China's relationship to Vietnam [Why Vietnam loves and hates China, Apr 26]. A more apposite example is the defeat of the Ming in its attempt to reimpose Chinese domination over Vietnam by Le Loi in 1428. Once the Ming troops withdrew, Le Loi ascended the throne and sent emissaries to the Ming emperor in Beijing to perform the ritual kowtow, putting Vietnam from afar under the protection of the Ming emperor as would a vassal to a feudal law. Le Loi, in this example, simply acknowledged the geopolitical realty of Vietnam to China. In terms a Westerner might better grasp, it was similar, broadly speaking, to Henry of Navarre saying, "Paris was worth a mass," as he took the crown of France, which quieted the bloodletting of religious warfare in France. So too for Le Loi, who thought that it was a small price to pay for Vietnam's independence and sovereignty. For those who wish to know more of China's stamp on Vietnam in an earlier period, the reader will do no wrong in reading Edward Schafer's The Vermilion Bird: T'ang Images of the South.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 27, '07)

In response to Dr Mohan Gurubatham's comments [letter, Apr 26] on my article Why Vietnam loves and hates China (Apr 26): This piece was devoted exclusively to the long relationship between Vietnam and China, in which the former Kingdom of Champa played small part. However, if Dr Gurubatham would care to read more on the latter, may I direct him to my The Chams, survivors of a lost civilisation?
Andrew Forbes
Thailand (Apr 27, '07)

Re Spengler's article [Tolkien's Christianity and the pagan tragedy, Apr 24]: Human cruelty, brutality and violence [are] callously associated with the image of Jesus of Nazareth put to death on the cross. The Christian theology is in a state of limbo, disorientation and disintegration because it is invaded by Western secularists and Zionists. This bleak sense of hopelessness is once gain haunting the globe as the modern crusaders march on madly searching for oil wells in the Muslim world, unleashing havoc and bloodshed worse than [that] of July 1199. The secular or modern Christians are once again terrorizing the Muslim world with their deadliest weapons of mass destruction and slaughter under their armpits. There is no hope for the Muslims and seemingly no end to the cycle of violence propagated and perpetrated by the warmongers, neo-con Christians and capriciously mischievous Zionist Jews, against them. Muslims are defending their nationhood, homelands, honor, dignity, freedom, liberty, their mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters against daily massacres as well as the looting intent of Christendom of [US President George W] Bush and [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair. As Martin Luther King demanded that the black Americans [be] afforded "God-given rights", besieged Muslims ask for the same rights. Christianity is actually the problem today, and many secularists believe that it is religious nonsense and advocate its abolition, believing that the West can become less aggressive, less belligerent and less racist towards the non-white and underdeveloped nations of the world. It was the followers of Christian faith that caused over 250 million casualties in Europe and around the world during the First and Second World Wars. Christianity and Jewish Zionism are destroying our world for their insatiable greed of oil, natural resources, military, political and economical hegemony over the weaker and vulnerable nations. Muslim countries are targeted as the West hungers for their wealth and also because Islam is threatening hearts and minds of millions of Christians in the Western world. Born-again Christian President G W Bush, American neo-cons, fundamentalists, fanatics and violent men of many illegal wars and invasions have presented their Christian faith as intellectually respectable and rational, therefore justifying their war-alcoholic philosophy and madness of massacring over 1 million innocent Muslims as a fight against terrorism.
Saqib Khan
UK (Apr 27, '07)

Whoever wrote the [index-page summary for] M K Bhadrakumar's April 19 article What Turkey teaches about democracy erred in terminology: "More than any US-inspired democratization program for the Middle East, Turkey has shown that Islamic democracy can be a better alternative to Arab secular autocracy." The term "Islamic democracy" is meaningless in the context of Turkey or even in general. To clarify, Turkey has a mature secular democracy where even a party with roots in and still courting with political Islamism may (and, in fact, has) come to power. In general, the concept of "Islamic democracy" is as devoid of meaning as that of a "Christian democracy". Unless and until the latter takes root as an intellectual construct, one cannot talk about the former. Fellow Asian observer Bhadrakumar disappoints further in his failure to resist the temptation of joining the Western observers who seek "the one", the "Islamic democracy to praise" in order to support whatever doctrine en vogue. Bhadrakumar is missing this: AKP [the Justice and Development Party] is just another political party with its own agenda. AKP's views are not the balance of views of Turkish society. In fact, Turkey is not a country where a party can get majority votes simply by speaking in ideological terms. There is always a complicated balance that a winning party must stand on. In 2002, AKP [was] given the privilege to serve the people - by election-law peculiarities that allowed it to get a parliamentary majority with the highest minority vote but still by way of democracy, to be fair. Out of all AKP votes, only a small portion could be considered "Islamist". Therefore, it is wrong to extend AKP's Islamism to the people or the system, as a strong undercurrent. To its credit, as far as most areas of economy and of rights and freedoms AKP did just what had to be done - but not everything that it could have done. Further credits are due to AKP for being the first party in the history of the Turkish religious right that seems to really understand that the privilege to serve the people, when abused, can be taken back by any and all means.
Mustafa Altintas
California, USA (Apr 27, '07)

The article by John Helmer Russian energy model challenges OPEC [Jul 18, '06] is a complete misrepresentation of the free-market dynamics of the oil industry, and plays 100% into the hands of the Russian agenda. If I did not read this from Asia Times Online, I would think it was a press release from the Russian government. I hope you [Helmer] can have some more objectivity when reporting on energy issues in the future. Otherwise, you really do a discredit to your news agency.
Bob (Apr 27, '07)

No one doubts that the Australians have in fact won the [cricket] World Cup 2007 in real style and that the final match between them and the Sri Lankans is played only as a formality. The Australian team has indeed played remarkably the World Cup matches to retain the Cup. They in fact enjoyed the entire tournament as real sportsmen. The fact that not many countries, including India and Pakistan, could even have the chance to play against them and the Aussies have won every match they played for the Cup at all levels clearly shows that they are the real masters of world cricket. It would have been … absurd if Australia had lost the finals after displaying their skills and talent all though. This World Cup 2007 has, however, disappointed the lovers of cricket with losing forever in international cricket batsmen like Brian Lara and Inzamam[-ul-Haq] who have bid goodbye. One significant positive development is the rise of Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and England as serious contenders in future. Kudos to the Australian cricketers, the winners of 2007 World Cup.
Dr Abdul Ruff Colachal
New Delhi, India (Apr 27, '07)

Defending champions Australia have indeed dominated this year's World Cup so far, but sportswriter Simon Hayden notes, "Australia is fully aware that Sri Lanka will be a very different side ... The final pits two clever Australian coaches against ... a well-balanced Sri Lanka side that is just as strong as when it beat Australia in the 1996 World Cup final in Lahore." - ATol

Why Vietnam loves and hates China [Apr 26] by Andrew Forbes is very interesting, informative and factual. The writer knows quite well the historical relationship between China and Vietnam. I'm looking forward to more reports on Vietnam by Andrew Forbes.
Tim Hoang
Canada (Apr 26, '07)

Andrew Forbes' article on Vietnam and its cultural link to China, Why Vietnam loves and hates China [Apr 26], is astute and contemporary. However, he glaringly glosses over an important historical fact that Champa in Vietnam was Hindu, or Vedic to be more accurate, and that this influence was found along the entire coast of Hue form north to south. The Champa museum in Vietnam documents this as do the Cham people. This culture was in its heyday from the 2nd to the 15th century. Sanskrit was used and Indian art was influential. Many deities and statues were revered such as Siva, and linga or lingams representing Siva as stones were and are to be found today in Vietnam. According to the Vietnamese Thanh Nien Daily (Apr 11), "The My Son temple complex is one of the foremost temple complexes of Hinduism in Southeast Asia and is the foremost heritage (UNESCO) site of its kind in Vietnam."
Mohan R Gurubatham, PhD
Vedic City, Iowa (Apr 26, '07)

China, Pakistan cooperate in space [Apr 26] by Syed Fazl-e-Haider is an informative and impressive article about Sino-Pak strategic partnership in space. Pakistan needs Chinese technology to move forward its space program. Pakistan and China are already cooperating in many fields. It is an important South Asian country with respect to its geography. Pakistan can prove an important strategic ally for China in future.
Arooj Nadeem
Quetta, Pakistan (Apr 26, '07)

Re Tolkien's Christianity and the pagan tragedy [Apr 24] by Spengler: To lay the horrors of World Wars I and II on resurgent paganism in Europe is absolute balderdash. Anyone who's seriously studied modern history would heartily concur with Mark Twain when he said that without Christian civilization, war would have remained a poor and trifling thing to the end of time. And [Friedrich] Nietzsche almost certainly got it right: the last Christian died on the cross. The real tragedy of European Pagan civilization is that it was subverted by this faux Christianity. Even to this very day practically everything that's joyful, charming and lovely in the Christian rituals is of pagan origin: the pageantry of Easter, the flying reindeer and gift-giving elves of Christmas, Halloween (All Saints' Eve) with its implicit reverential embrace of the unfathomable mystery and magic of the world. Everything else in Christianity is but the joyless despotic barren Wahhabism that's so typical of the Arabs and the Jews.
Jose R Pardinas, PhD
San Diego, California (Apr 26, '07)

are u a cia front?
snorky (Apr 26, '07)

sorry, that's classified. - atol

Fazile Zahir's commentary [Sporting a new style for women, Apr 25] on the trials and tribulations of primarily Muslim women in the emerging internationalization of sport activities and proper outfits allows one, with certain trepidations, to offer an observation or two and await a "j'accuse" follow-up. The first observation that comes to mind involves the dogma that in not dressing and acting as her counterpart in non-Islamic societies the Muslim woman is missing out on life. Admittedly a male is at a disadvantage in judging the pros and cons. Still, one would venture that the potentialities of non-Islamic women to dress and act as Islamic women are as valid a choice. In reference to "new" sporting styles for women, one can remember the days when sport shoes for everyone were called "tennis shoes". Nowadays no one can be caught wearing a "running" shoe while walking or a "jogging" shoe while at the gym or not doing their Pilates exercises without a Pilates mat. As the (in)famous native American is quoted to having said, "You cannot get to know me unless you have walked in my shoes." Maybe the best way to get to know and judge women's dress styles, as well as shoes, is to exchange wearing theirs for yours. Thanks to Ms Zahir for an informative commentary.
Armand De Laurell (Apr 25, '07)

Anil Netto's Malaysian hub plan runs into race debate [Apr 25] presents yet another vivid picture on how one unique nation, with all the advantages (Chinese are good merchants, businessmen, entrepreneurs [and] scientists while Indians are good civil servants, administrators, lawyers [and] doctors), within seemingly easy leveraging and full of potential to becoming the most successful Southeast Asian nation, squanders so miserably these unprecedented and once-in-a-lifetime opportunities on the lame pretext of "affirmative action" to help redress the allegedly disadvantaged economical positions of the notoriously coined bumiputera ("prince of soil") community. Honestly speaking, for an educated/enlightened scholar, bumiputera-ism smacks of nothing short of outright racism and is comparable to the utterly discredited apartheid, white Australian [discrimination], black African slave trade; albeit this time around, it is being perpetrated by a race who claims to have been wronged by others in history and whose religion [has been] repressed by the West. Franking speaking, this ambitious project, like so many of its predecessors (eg Proton, the national car; Perwaja, the steel plant; MAS, the national carrier; MSC (Multimedia Super Corridor); the IT R&D [information-technology research and development] hub, etc), is destined to fail because of one primary factor (the Malays will be too slighted to admit it): it is all in the race ... Mark my lips, it will not be too far-fetched to predict Malaysia will slowly and surely descend into another economically failed state in 20 or 30 years' time, just like its notorious neighbors, Indonesia and the Philippines.
A disillusioned Chinese-Malaysian (Apr 25, '07)

Bertil Lintner: Congratulations on the extensive April 24 Asia Times Online article about North Korea's information-technology industry [North Korea's IT revolution]. I'm recommending that colleagues/key contacts be sure to access the Asia Times Online website to review it.
Keith Luse
Senior Professional Staff Member
US Senate Foreign Relations Committee
Washington, DC (Apr 25, '07)

I just navigated to your page, as I do every [morning]. I try to screen out all the garbage ads that have no relevance for me. Now there are ones that do a tapping sound like cups being stacked. It's sufficiently annoying that it will likely discourage my coming to your site, as I resent the intrusion on my concentration. I don't believe that you need to resort to those tactics to earn ad revenue. The annoying pop-ups don't happen, for example, at Google's site. Google is the world leader in Web-based ad-revenue generation. Maybe there's something to learn there. Thanks for your efforts to bring the world new news.
Tom Pfotzer (Apr 25, '07)

We do subscribe to Google's ad-placement service, but these don't bring in much revenue, and we are forced to rely on other ad agencies, which sometimes place ads such as the extremely annoying "clinking cups" item you mention. We understand, however, that this particular ad is being redesigned at source because of global complaints, including from Asia Times Online's technical department. - ATol

Regarding Pepe Escobar's article We build walls, not nations [Apr 24]: Rather than comparing the Adhamiyah wall to those of Israel or Berlin, wouldn't a better analogy be the sectarian walls of Northern Ireland? Comparing it to Berlin's or Israel's may allow Escobar more pessimistic license, but Northern Ireland's sectarian walls have been quite effective at reducing violence. The walls in Israel and Berlin were built by nations that wanted to separate their own populations from the "other"; the walls in Northern Ireland were imposed by a foreign authority to reduce internecine violence it felt responsible for. Like I said, a better analogy.
Andrew MacDonald
Toronto, Ontario (Apr 24, '07)

Bertil Lintner is, among other things, a North Korea watcher. His interest has not come of late nor of blind suddenness. North Korea's IT revolution [Apr 24] is of interest for sure, but Lintner has neglected some details. America's Korea Society, under the leadership of former United States ambassador to Seoul Donald M Gregg, helped initiate and sponsor an exchange program in information technology between Cornell University and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. The program brought to that Ivy League campus a handful of North Koreans. There they went through intensive training in the ins and outs of information technology. Thus we see a program which has had the caution of the United States government aiding the DPRK in training its hand-picked candidates in the latest lore of IT, on one hand; on the other hand, we see that very same United States government until recently attacking Pyongyang in the world's public forums and denying it access to the world's financial markets. Although North Korea may play its cards close to its chest, it does not logically follow that it is not privy to the latest state-of-the-art technology, which Lintner does acknowledge. However North Korea may restrict the use of the Internet to its citizens, it does not turn a blind eye to advances in science and technology. The Korea Society's rush to help train North Korean cadres in a top American university simply underscores a carrot approach to foreign affairs which until of late had not come out of the cold.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 24, '07)

With reference to Armand De Laurell's question in the Letters section dated April 23 on the issue of the appropriate penalties for Shaha Riza, my view is that sleeping with "Wolfie" has been punishment enough for her, rendering other measures moot.
Chan Akya (Apr 24, '07)

May I tell you a delightful story narrated to me a long time ago by an old retired army colonel during the British raj about mangoes and their intoxicating smell creating hallucinatory effects on some women? John Smith, a senior civil servant working in Multan [in Punjab], was having regular late-afternoon tea with his wife in their garden under a Chaunsa or Sindhri mango tree and the mangoes were in full bloom, dispersing a delicious smell. Suddenly, Mrs Smith ran and climbed up the mango tree and started shouting at her husband, "What are you doing with that woman?" Mr Smith shouted in amazement, "Which woman? There is no woman with me and you are imagining things." "No," she said, "You are making love to your girlfriend, I can see from the top of the tree." He replied in amusement that she was hallucinating because the intoxicating delicious smell of mangoes had affected her fancy. She came running down and said to him that he had hidden his girlfriend behind the bushes as soon as he saw her coming. After a while, Mr Smith got very curious and thought, why not to test her story? So he went and climbed to the top of the tree and as soon as he did that, his wife's lover jumped from behind the bushes and they started making love, disturbing all the birds. Mr Smith looked down and saw the actual play and shouted at her, "Who is that man you are making love with?" She replied that he was hallucinating as she did when sitting in the tree and watching him. "There is no man with me, you fool; you are intoxicated with the smell." Infidelity, is thy name woman?
Saqib Khan
UK (Apr 24, '07)

Both of the battling Begums of Bangladesh, former prime ministers Hasina and Khaleda, have been afforded generous opportunities to serve their country and both of them have abused this privilege and used national politics as a venue to carry out personal vendettas and family feuds. They are the problem, not the solution. If they love their country and wish to serve Bangladesh, I would like to suggest that they would do that best by getting out of politics altogether.
Cha-am Jamal
Thailand (Apr 24, '07)

Regarding L Hadar's The revenge of the political man of April 21: I agree that perhaps in the dialectic between the "Economic Man" and his "antithesis", the "Political Man", a new synthesis will emerge; the pendulum of history will always swing to and fro. However, Mr Hadar has not stated anything new here. [Friedrich] Engels and [Karl] Marx essentially stated and predicted this, and globalization, its discontents and even the two US wars are an extension of this dialectic.
Jubin Ajdari
Los Angeles, California (Apr 23, '07)

Re The revenge of the political man [Apr 21] by Leon Hadar: "There you go again," [former US president Bill] Clinton did it!!! This whole mess is his fault. Repeat after me, "Ditto, ditto, ditto!" You are a very clever, verbose man, Mr Hadar. This long-winded, clever, trendy, monologue should have gone in The Weekly Standard along with whatever garbage [editor William] Kristol was spouting. The really amazing thing about the Clinton administration was what it accomplished along with dragging the whole reactionary machine behind it for eight years. They crucified Clinton on a corporate cross of money (I'm going to hate myself in the morning, apologies to no one) but he is risen again! "Logic is logic, I always say" and what Clinton was doing was always logical within the straitjacket the Ideologues of the reactionaries imposed on him. I'm not such a Utopian dreamer as to believe this whole problem will disappear by the election of the right person. This whole scientific era has a long way to go. "We live in interesting times."
William O Bishop
Eugene, Oregon (Apr 23, '07)

Re Chan Akya's Bang for the buck [Apr 21]: Mr Akya is again true to form in pointing out the "role" of money (ATol's December 2006 issue included a commentary titled ... It's the money, honey [Dec 22]) in today's world. On reading the first part of his commentary, Madeleine Albright's challenge to Colin Powell (what's the use of having all this military power if we do not use it) becomes symbolic of the question that needs to be asked. Who owns or buys a real or play gun without believing that the day will come when they will use it? The propensity of the human to imagine imitating others such as Alexander the Great, any Caesar, Napoleon to the present electronic figures on some video game is an outgrowth of boys playing cowboys and Indians. Is there a rational basis for not considering that the daily close to 100 dead in Baghdad is as heinous as the 33 dead at Virginia Tech? In reference to l'affaire Wolfowitz, Mr Akya made no observations of the conduct of [Paul] Wolfowitz' paramour. A modicum of fairness entails that Ms Shaha [Riza]'s contract and salary increase be made null and void and that if Wolfie leaves she too should. What say you, Mr Akya?
Armand De Laurell (Apr 23, '07)

Re Bang for the buck [Apr 21] by Chan Akya: I do agree with him to a large extent that the "two recent media stories on the tragic shooting of innocent students in Virginia and the sex scandal at the World Bank are linked, in that both represent the decline of society's values against the forces of untrammeled materialism". One thing that struck me ... was that [most] of the people interviewed said about [US mass murderer] Seung-Hui Cho, "He never spoke but he frightened everyone." Cho lived in isolation and his sense of alienation throughout his teenage years was possibly exacerbated by racism in the American society. He was a psychopath in the making, as the gory details of his life [have] revealed. All the causes and effects of his disturbed and violent personality were known to the authorities and he was let loose to plot the horrific massacre. It was a flawed way of relying upon Western thinking, philosophy, psychology and morality that encourages this breed of misfits in the society to grow up. Cho planned for many months and acted upon his sordid fancy of committing stomach-churning violence of hate and slaughter of the 32 innocents and injuring so many others. After September 11, 2001, because of President [George W] Bush's belligerent imperialistic foreign policy and unethical greed of oil and materialism, our world has become increasingly violent and destructive. Every day we read, see and hear nothing but death and destruction on a horrendous scale all around us. Innocent people are dying in thousands in Iraq, Afghanistan and every corner of the globe. Violence is glamorized and commercialized in the movies and on TV screens for making dollars and profiting ... Sadly, the right to bear arms is enshrined in the American constitution and the arms manufacturers will always fight against amending the constitution. With regard to [Paul] Wolfowitz, he is a showman, a performer with a penchant for prolixity and his opponents are lining to rattle him downhill ... I should say to him, "What the hell, Mr Wolfowitz, everything is fair in love and war, and love is blind. Kings have lost empires and some have given up their thrones for the love of their life." I would lastly like to say that the Multani mangoes are an excellent aphrodisiac, which Dr [Rashid] Hassan failed to mention [letters, Apr 18 and 20].
Saqib Khan
UK (Apr 23, '07)

Remembering those who died in Virginia Tech University saddens every heart in the world, more so their parents, kith and kin and those close to them. Would [US President George W] Bush [and British Prime Minister Tony] Blair pause for a moment and ponder; those 700,000 innocent civilians they killed in Iraq [and] Afghanistan had also their parents [and] near ones left behind to grieve forever. Their grief is unprecedentedly painful for hundred of thousands in the wake of Bush-Blair's mercilessly killing; compounded by engineered Shi'a-Sunni civil war have been rendered homeless, shelterless, hungry, diseased, widowed, orphaned, disabled, maimed to live a miserable life. Yet the two heartless brutes have no mercy and remorse but their neo-con rendezvous of the plundering their resources and wealth. Let the world remember those 700,000 killed and those left destitute by the unforgivable sin of commission and omission of Messrs Bush, Blair and associates. Would world conscience awake and try them in [the International Court of Justice] for their crimes to humanity.
Miss Zeenat-e-Jehan
Karachi, Pakistan (Apr 23, '07)

When Kaveh L Afrasiabi, in Waiting for Godot - but only Gates arrives (Apr 21), states that "the Godot of Iran-US rapprochement will never arrive as long as there is no paradigmatic shift in the US's power approach to Iran", he can only mean one thing: the US (and Israel) must accept the new power paradigm of a nuclear Iran. Never once does Dr Afrasiabi provide us with any hint that Iran would - or should - back down on its "irreversible" path towards the acquisition of nuclear weapons. Instead, he is more intent on bolstering Iran's supposed standing in the Arab world by reassuring us that the Saudi leader, King Abdullah, has "embraced Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad with open arms". The fact is that the US is planning to sell weaponry such as tanks, warships and advanced air-defense systems to Saudi Arabia and other [Persian] Gulf countries valued at between $5 [billion] and $10 billion. This follows the relaunching of the land-for-peace initiative at an Arab League summit held last month in Riyadh, which offers Israel normal ties with all Arab states in return for a full withdrawal from the lands it seized in the 1967 Six Day War, creation of a Palestinian state, and a "just solution" for Palestinian refugees. And notwithstanding the additional fact that the US is covertly involved in anti-Shi'ite (or anti-Iranian) operations in places like Lebanon (see Pepe Escobar's Hezbollah's big challenge, Apr 19) and Afghanistan (see M K Bhadrakumar's Iran, US take their fight to Afghanistan, Apr 21), the region is fast shaping itself into a Sunni-Shi'ite confrontation that will further isolate a belligerent Iran in its nuclear stand-off with the West.
Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin
Canberra, Australia (Apr 23, '07)

Jim Lobe's article Iraq violence resurges amid 'surge' (Apr 21) reveals that the babble about Iraq being won or lost and its consequences is just that, babble. Iraq has never been America's to win or lose. Iraq belongs to the people of Iraq and it is theirs to win or lose. The Bush administration, through its ideological delusions and ignorance, cheered on by its neo-con supporters and now Senator [John] McCain, started something it cannot finish without further destroying thousands of Iraqi lives and hundreds more American lives. The reality is that Iraq is, and will always be, an Islamic, Shi'ite-majority nation with close ties to its neighbor, Iran. Any freely elected government will reflect that as the present government does. The Bush administration and its assorted supporters have not come to terms with that reality. Instead, it has tried to form an alliance of the region's autocrats - Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan - against Iran, all regimes which turn a blind eye as material and insurgents pour into Iraq from their respective countries to kill and maim our [US] service personnel. To resolve the Iraqi conflict, there must be regional diplomacy, something the Bush administration has been loath to do. The overwhelming majority of Iraqis see the United States as occupiers, not as liberators, and the day is coming near when the Iraqi government will tell the United States to get out. To do so honorably, the United States must engage Syria and Iran in direct, unconditional negotiations based on mutual respect, otherwise nothing will change. And the cost of [US President George W] Bush's adventure in Iraq in men and materials will continue to mount with no end in sight.
Fariborz S Fatemi
McLean, Virginia (Apr 23, '07)

Iran, US take their fight to Afghanistan [Apr 21] is an enlightening review of American Afghan policy by M K Bhadrakumar. It continues to amaze me how completely and comprehensively the Bush administration uses all its propaganda tools and all its forces to present a united political front. With the continuation of spurious charges against Iran, one could easily believe that it is preparing for an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, but perhaps that is just the continuing neo-con flavor of bellicosity. One would expect a military professional like General [Peter] Pace to stay out of the political fray, but he seems to willingly be a Bush administration propaganda tool with an ever-ready vilification of Bill Clinton, as well as joining in the anti-Iran rhetoric.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Apr 23, '07)

Tsering Namgyal's In the supermarket of spirituality [Apr 21] sure makes great, interesting reading material if not for his utterly unfortunate and unnecessary gaffe (some would beg to assert that his alleged insinuations are downright untruths) regarding the alleged "languish[ing]" of his homeland under the "occupying" Han Chinese, "decimation" of Tibetan Lama-ish spiritualism by the introduction of the new Qinghai-Tibet Railway, somehow "evil conspiracy" of Han Chinese migration in overwhelming the local Tibetan population etc. While I am not going to spoil the good atmosphere the article helps generate, the following facts need to be strongly articulated:

Tibet before liberation was ruled by an ultra-conservative/utterly unjust privileged Buddhist Lama-ish elite which treated its subjects like nothing but indenture slaves. Han Chinese rule not only granted complete autonomy to the indigenous Tibetans but also brought about economic/spiritual advancements to this backward and landlocked plateau. On top of it all, Tibetan cultures/traditions are greatly respected and protected. Just pause and compare this situation to the pitiful fates [that befell] the indigenous North American Indians, Eskimos, Australian aborigines, South American Indians, black African slaves etc and one would not fail to realize who stood higher on the moral ground.

The Qinghai-Tibet Railway brings real/tangible economical benefits to the Tibetans, and to suggest otherwise is obnoxious if not mischievous.

There are five major communities in China - Han, Manchu, Mongolian, Uighur and Tibetan - and all of them have had the absolute rights to move and reside anywhere within the national boundary.
While I truly and wholeheartedly join the author in celebration of the wonders of Tibetan Buddhism's spiritual rites and beliefs, some non-believers may wonder whether this "spirituality" may have already outlived its time and [be] seriously out of step with the 21st century. This should, however, [be construed] only as a friendly reminder and does not in any way mean disrespect to the great Tibetan people.
W S Lee
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (Apr 23, '07)

It is unclear reading Sudha Ramachandran's Mango mania in India [Apr 21] whether Indian farmers are still using "too many pesticides" in growing mangoes, which was the reason that the United States banned their imports 18 years ago. And this lack of clarity raises questions about the deleterious short- and long-term effects that mangoes with high dosages of pesticides, which may very well come from American agri-business, will have on those who will buy this juicy fruit in Japan or America or Europe. Now that the Mittal octopus has stretched its tentacles into fruits and vegetables, it is plain as the writing on the wall that the small Indian farmer will not benefit from the sugar-plum visions of exporting India's mangoes. More likely than not, Mittal and Co will corner the market as middleman, buying cheaply and selling dear. Although the Mittal clan has not written the textbook on exploitation, they will go by the numbers to boost local production by tying local farmers into iron-clad contracts with less-than-generous terms, to monopolize the exporting of mangoes. The globalization of Indian mangoes will spike domestic prices, no doubt. Like bad money it will drive out the good, thereby allowing the burgeoning middle and upper classes to delectate the sweetness of India mangoes while putting them out of the reach of the poor. The overseas market will strain local farmers' resources, exhaust the soil, and ultimately, as is with most commodities, may collapse the market by overproducing.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 23, '07)

Re The devil's dictionary of war in Iraq [Apr 19]: The essence of The Devil's Dictionary, as I recall it, was pithiness. Ambrose Bierce was short and to the point, and generally humorous, something which Tom Engelhardt seems to have overlooked in his reference, and his article. More significantly, many, and indeed probably most, Americans at this point are saying the same thing as our new lexicographer: [President George W] Bush, his war, and his war machine are complete failures. They have dressed up that pig of a "war", and put lipstick and makeup on it, but it is still a pig. As was recently noted in the New York Times, and elsewhere, in an analogy far closer to Bierce's approach: in regard to the question of whether Bush is the worst president of all time, Bush is like Hank Aaron after breaking the record for home runs in baseball. He didn't just stop there, he was determined to put the record out of reach, and so continued on. Similarly, in response to the same question, the answer would be no, because you have to consider Robert Mugabe as possibly worse. This is, of course, open to debate, because Mugabe is only screwing up his own country. What is sad in this debate is that the new team in Iraq, particularly General [David] Petraeus, seems capable and diligent, and recognizes the need for a political solution. The stupidity of the Bush administration and the force of their edicts will probably stifle them, but it is sad to see hope and talent injected at this late hour, when we know they will be crushed. Still, what is there left to "win" when there is not just a single entity or country to defeat? Is the US supposed to pacify and subdue the entire country? That is so stupid only a loyal Bushie could envision it. Bombing? Permanent bases? The US public knows about all that. The question is how to stop Bush and stop the war. What may happen is that the next election in the US may see a complete rejection of the Republican Party, unless, possibly, Bush ends the war by that time, and declares victory.
Richard Stone (Apr 23, '07)

Credit where credit is due. For the most part, Spengler's latest piece The Inconvenient Serbs [Apr 17] is a welcome reality check regarding the Kosovo question. The demonizing of the Serbs has become an almost cottage industry in the US. I would suggest to those skeptics on this topic, Diana Johnstone's book, Fool's Crusade, and the film Avoidable War (free downloads online). Both will provide more of the history that Spengler touches on. Clinton's terror bombing of civilian Belgrade was a war crime. Milosevic may have been many things - a bad economist for one - but a war criminal? Hardly - in fact he showed amazing restraint in the face of KLA [Kosovo Liberation Army] and Croat aggression. Remember the ustashi? Google that for a quick primer on some recent history. Or the name Naser Oric. That most readers will not know these things and names speaks to the powerful PR campaign led by marketing firms hired by Washington in the 1990s. I never thought I would say it, but good one, Spengler.
John Steppling
Lodz, Poland (Apr 20, '07)

Robert Neff brings little to the discussion on flags of convenience (FOC) in Flags that hide the dirty truth [April 20] He tells an old story. Panama, Liberia and the US Marshall Islands have long profited in the business of FOCs. Neff may not know that the Reagan administration, to [stop] the transfer of technology to the Soviet Union and its satellites, sought to tar an American oil company with the brush of the Trading with the Foreign Enemy Act [TWFEA], and the enemies in this particular instance were Yugoslavia and North Korea. The Commerce Department had discovered that the oil company had sold drilling ships to Belgrade for geophysical exploration in North Korea's waters. After an extensive investigation, the matter was dropped for the plain and simple reason that the sale was made by a foreign-registered subsidiary, and the ships flew the Panamanian flag. As such, the sale did not legally fall within the TWFEA's purview. The convenience of such flags is obvious, and they are common currency for corporations and countries for many reasons, be it for espionage, smuggling, tax evasion, and so on. Bertil Lintner has no love for North Korea, and why should he? His rapier-like pen is forever ready to wound Pyongyang's pride. Since North Korea's signing of the six-party accord on February 13 last year, a sea change in coming to terms with Kim Jong-il's regime has taken place. Take the recent example of the Financial Times of London's April 18 editorial calling on Mr Kim to live up to the clauses of that agreement. The mere addressing of Kim Jong-il as Mr Kim is a sign that he has gained a degree of respectability which heretofore he did not in a paper of note. It is all too easy to dismiss this use of Mr Kim as an example of irony, but such an understanding misses the point, because Mr Kim is intent on dismantling his nuclear reactors. Yet the object all sublime of Linter's scold is that Mr Kim simply knocks the pins out from under his own rule.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 20, '07)

I am a regular reader of Asia Times Online. I like the in-depth anlysis it presents to its readers worldwide. I have noticed that you publish less business stories from Pakistan, which is an important country in South Asia, as compared to India. On the other hand, you publish more political stories by Syed Saleem Shahzad, who has projected [an image of] Pakistan as a country like Afghanistan. This is discrimination against the South Asian country. Asia Times Online is a prestigious source of information. It does not suit you to be biased in the coverage of news stories from South Asia. You must be impartial with a balanced approach.
Haris Zaidi
Karachi, Pakistan (Apr 20, '07)

First of all I welcome the venerable concept of a free trade zone between India and Pakistan and hope that while Pakistan and India are engaged in Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline arrangements, some way can be found for accommodating the free trade zone D Bhardwaj [Apr 19] is proposing. Multan mangoes have domestic as well as medicinal [uses] in Pakistan. I will come back to this a little later. Lahore is about 300 miles from Multan, which would appear to be quite a distance, so much so that Lahore came to be blessed with Islam 500 years after Multan did and this is probably because Islam travelled into the sub-continent through Multan. More than 60 years ago, when Bhardwaj's family might have left Lahore on partition, communications between Multan and Lahore must have been scant and fairly skeletal. As a doctor of medicine born to a family of hereditary landowners and currently residing in the Westren hemisphere who visits Western supermarkets daily, I felt best placed to make the statement I made. People who know Multan will confirm that the people of Multan have well-established traditions using mangoes in several ways, thanks to the difference in pulp texture of the different varieties of mango grown in Multan and the surrounding areas. Starting with mango pulp-butter paste at breakfast, there are various uses of the Multani mango throughout the day up to dinner. On rainy days during scorching hot Multani summers, young people, professionals and families have riverside mango picnics arranged at very short notice. Mango growers and landowner politicians from Multan oblige their friends and fellow politicians in upper Punjab and other provinces with gifts of free crates of mangos. Mango diplomacy, if executed correctly, is sometimes successful and one should hope that that turns out to be the case in strengthening ties with India. From the literature that I have seen, it would appear that for at least the past 40 years Multani physicians have been prescribing mangoes for seriously ill patients who need a diet that is high in calories and fibre but very low in protein. Residing here in the West, I come across mangoes in the local supermarkets from Africa, the Americas and Europe. I have bought them, brought them home and had a bite or two and binned them. Not only do they not match any of the qualities attributed to Multani mangoes, my personal view is that even animals wouldn't eat them. Unsurprisingly, physicians in the West seem to be totally unfamiliar with the use of mango as panacea-type source of nutrition for patients, particularly those with liver diseases. Mango diplomacy is a Multani concept. Try it.
Dr Rashid Hassan (Apr 20, '07)

The letter from Dr Rashid Hassan [Apr 18] needs a comment. I find it hard to believe Dr Hassan's claim unless he backs it up with some references or states that he is a doctor of agriculture with expertise in mangoes, or that he has personally tasted Indian and Pakistani mangoes to reach such a conclusion. Since we in the sub-continent readily trade bullets and missiles rather than mangoes, it's difficult for me to refute Dr Hassan's claim. I have not had a chance to taste mangoes from Pakistan. But I have the word of my father, who lived in the Pakistani city of Lahore in undivided India and is very fond of mangoes, who told me that India has a larger variety of - and better-tasting - mangoes than Pakistan. Indian mango varieties are even named after the specific places they are grown in such as Malda, Amravati, etc. That brings me to an interesting fact: many traders in New Delhi sell their grapes as "Chaman ke Angoor" or famous grapes from a place called Chaman in Pakistan. But no Delhite will know the difference as he has not tasted the authentic grapes from Chaman. Similar are claims about superior Basmati rice and wheat from Pakistan. I think the best way to resolve this issue with Dr Hasssan will be to have a free trade zone between India and Pakistan so that all in the subcontinent can taste the fruit from either side and form genuine opinions, and also taste other benefits such as the fruit of peace.
D Bhardwaj
Chicago, Illinois (Apr 19, '07)

I'm impressed. After reading your replies to Dennis Atwood and Soumya Srajan concerning your organization, I feel ATol is a study in optimal business effectiveness and efficiency. With only five dedicated newsdesk hounds backed by a "couple of technical and administrative people on staff in Hua Hin, as well as very small staffs in Bangkok and Hong Kong", you are able to: 1) Source and select the thousands of news and articles for the day. 2) plan, edit and publish your news/editorials daily 3) wade through hundreds (if not thousands) of letters, select, edit or reply/comment on the few that could be included in your letters page, and more importantly, still find time to canvass sufficient income via advertisements etc to run it with growing success. Keep up the good work. I wish you ever more success so I can continue to keep reading my favorite online magazine that is ever getting better and better.
Walter Tseng Kin-Wah (Apr 19, '07)

Thanks, but the "thousands" of articles per day is more like 15. - ATol

Bertil Lintner's A how-to guide for fleeing China [April 18] has topped his previous [articles] in [provoking] chuckles. While there is no doubt that a lot of people in less developed or poor countries want to reach America, Canada or prosperous European countries, it defies logic for a Chinese to spend US$35,000 to be "smuggled" into the US. Consider the living wage of 600 yuan per month, and the US dollar-to-yuan ratio of 7.8 - that sum is enough to sustain [a person for] about 37 years. If the intentional illegal immigrant [can] raise this sum of money, he must be a good con artist and does not need to "flee" his homeland - to be subject to threats, below-average wages, and fear of being deported.
S P Li
China (Apr 19, '07)

The city where al-Qaeda reigns [Apr 17] is a "must read" for leaders of the West who have some compassion. For those without, it's wasted. The pain, dislocation, fear, death and despair caused by the Bush administration and all those who, for varying reasons, supported this foray, must be recognized. With the potent power of self-deception, it is too easy to pardon such sins under the pretense of spreading democracy, eliminating a dictator, or whatever. Dahr Jamail provides a great service to those shielded from the realties of many Iraqi cities. Perhaps more American leaders will see the need for ending this carnage as quickly as possible. It has dragged on too long.
Jim
Southern California, USA (Apr 18, '07)

As someone who translated for a fact-finding mission from Washington to Kosovo in 1993, I can say that The Inconvenient Serbs [Apr 18] is a great and accurate article. If the writer would like to find out what is currently wrong at Foggy Bottom, Undersecretary for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns would be a good place to start. Until this former Special Assistant to Bill Clinton is replaced by the Bush administration, so that common sense prevails, US anti-terror policy is consistent worldwide, and outrageous comments that inflame much of the world are no longer made (for example, Burns boldly proclaims that the US will respect any Muslim declaration of independence for Kosovo even if the UN vetos it), it is hard to see how State Department mishandling of Kosovo, with its dangerous domino effects around the world, can be avoided. When the US government starts speaking for itself again, instead of having members of the Council on Foreign Relations, like Burns, do the talking, there will be no end to the harm to US interests and world peace that will done, even if these policies meet with the disapproval of, and ultimately burden, the American people.
Alex Malich
USA (Apr 18, '07)

Dennis O'Connell defines hypocrisy. The reason why Saddam's Iraq should be invaded, according to him, is the following: "It could make no claim to be a decent member of the civilized community of nations. Iraq had started two wars with its neighbors in 11 years and hundreds of thousands [were murdered] to maintain Saddam [Hussein]'s criminal regime, where tens of thousands of Iraqi children died for lack of food and medicine as Saddam spent billions on his palaces." If I understand you correctly, O'Connell, you are saying your country invaded Iraq because Saddam was a dictator who was brutal toward his own people and bad enough to start two wars with Iraq's neighbors in 11 years. You do know one of the neighbors that Iraq fought was Iran, and the US actively supported Iraq fighting Iran, don't you? Rumsfeld even went to Baghdad to greet Saddam "the murderer". How ironic! Yes [China deserves] its fair share of blame for befriending dictatorships, but your country's track record of supporting and dealing with dictatorships is not bad either. From Idi Amin, Botha, Ngo Dihn Diem to Marcos, Noriega, Park Chung-hee, Pinochet and Pol Pot (who was also backed by China), the list is quite long. As for why and how I chose my handle, it is nothing of your interest. I am addressing my letters using that pseudonym simply because that's my handle on The Edge forum and I want to keep it consistent. Numerous letter writers from [China] have used their real names without any problems. What, you think me mocking your hypocrisy will get me into trouble? Ha! You do live in a country where you can sign your real name, where freedom and liberty blossom; but you also live in a country where hypocrisy flourishes.
Juchechosunmanse
Beijing, China (Apr 18, '07)

Referring to Maoists face up to political reality [Apr 11] by Dhruba Adhikary, Nepal, being one of the small countries in the world, does not need to elect a federal system. Offering autonomy to provinces based on ethnic representation is an extremely difficult task. Accommodating demands of all ethnic groups would result in making Nepal a permanent battlefield. There was/is no need to declare Nepal as a secular republic. Nepal is known as a Hindu country and there was never any issue about religion in Nepal. The superficial changes are not going to resolve critical problems. People have been longing for action. The government of Nepal should be more concernedabout working towards peace and stability.
Tanya White
Canada (Apr 18, '07)

Regarding India, US trade mangoes for motorcycles [Apr 18], for accuracy of record, please note that to the best of my knowledge and belief, Pakistan produces the best mangoes in the world and, to be more specific, mangoes produced in the Multan region of Pakistan are of absolutely incomparable quality and taste.
Dr Rashid Hassan
Pakistan (Apr 18, '07)

Bertil Lintner's A new breed of migrants fans out [Apr 17] purported to put a geostrategic/geopolitical or even sinister spin on a rather straight forward/normal wave of human migration which, by the way, had occured umpteen times [before]. The biggest winners resulting from the most recent (18th & 19th century) demographic "rearrangements", so to speak, are none other than the decsendants of the old Western imperialist powers, especially the Anglo Saxon race - just imagine how horribly unjust for one particular race to have grabbed North America, Australia, New Zealand, etc (let alone the minor territorial grabs like the Falklands, some Pacific islands etc ...); while the biggest losers are the overpopulated, then dying Asian empires like China and India. In fact, patriotic/nationalist Asians never quite accept this current status quo and lament at what a golden "opportunity" lost (or what a heavy price we paid) for our ancestors' folly for being weak at such a critical point of time in history. Take Australia and New Zealand, for example. We Asians are truly perplexed as to why and how two white"potatoes" can be so ill-fitted into the midst of one giant Asian continent? Would it not be fairer, for the sake of world justice, for these two lumps of land to be proportionally distributed to the overpopulated Asian countries like China, India, Indonesia, Japan, etc? Australia is particularly hated in much of Asia for her arrogant posturings in world affairs (in close synchrony with her original Western partners) and especially her active willingness to act as a policing sheriff for the US while New Zealand is much better liked for being the most "humble" white country in Asia. Perhaps it would be wise for White Australians to size-up and eventually sell out and ship back to North America/Europe before it is too late! (if Australians feel this suggestion is "racist", then pause and imagine an Asian nation transplanted into the midst of continental Europe, which acts like a big-brother Asian; towering, lecturing and policing like a China/India/Japan Sheriff and wants to be part of Europe only when she finds it convenient and economically expedient, etc ...) Wow! The above rant is merely "food-for-thought" for the mean-minded Asians. This should not, however, serve as reference material for the policymakers across Asia!
Truly Asian
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (Apr 18, '07)

Bertil Lintner's article (A new breed of migrants fans out, Apr 17) is shortsighted and does not seem to have a firm grasp of history. New migrants have strong ties to the Old Country? Is that so surprising? Does Lintner expect someone born in China not to have any feelings whatsoever? Is a British migrant to the US expected to talk with a Texan twang? Is it so wrong for a South Asian migrant to London to continue to keep up with the cricket scores of Pakistan? Immigration history teaches us that it always takes a few generations for assimilation to occur. This is needed as the descendants grow fluent in the adopted country's language and culture. As the original migrants pass away, ties to the Old Country are severed and a new generation is born. Immigration has always been a part of the human storybook and to paint the Chinese as some horde out to envelop the world in a yellow tsunami is racial bias at its worst.
Vigilant Reason
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (Apr 17, '07)

Is the new breed of Chinese immigrants (A new breed of migrants fans out, Apr 17) any different from the British immigrants or Israeli immigrants or even US immigrants? And is having more confidence being Chinese any different than being British, Jewish or American? If not, then why single them out? What is [Bertil Lintner's] motivation in writing such an article?
Yen
Shanghai, China (Apr 17, '07)

Kaveh L Afrasiabi sets out, as usual, to reassure us all of Iran's good intentions in Cracks in the Iran nuclear stalemate [Apr 17]. He states that "no matter how assiduous, or sincere, Iran's confidence-building steps, Arab fears of Iranian nuclear proliferation run rampant and have been driving a greater push by Saudi Arabia, Egypt and others to possess nuclear technology". Military analysts now broadly agree that if push came to shove, the region's Sunni/Arab governments would indeed support, although grudgingly, a United States military strike on Iran. To this end, US President George W Bush has at his disposal the go-ahead for an all-out nuclear assault on Iran (and also North Korea) code-named Conplan 8022[-02]. The operation itself bears an uncanny resemblance to US contingency plans that were in place against Iraq in the first Gulf War in 1991. The head of the US military's chiefs of staff at the time, former general Colin Powell, has since admitted to the existence of detailed battle plans involving the launch of nuclear missiles from US submarines stationed in the Persian Gulf. Now, in 2007, Conplan 8022[-02] is designed to meet various permutations of the following contingencies: the crossing into Iraq of over a million Iranian soldiers in support of their Shi'ite brothers-in-arms to help combat the US military occupation; the launching by Iran of its arsenal of Shahab-3 missiles equipped with chemical warheads into Israel, Lebanon and Iraq; provision for the total destruction of Iran's highly secretive network of concrete-reinforced underground nuclear facilities; and various others. While Dr Afrasiabi extols Iran's assiduousness and sincerity, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, has recently warned that the Iranian response to inspections has been "complicated" at best and that Iran needed to do far more to reassure the world community of its peaceful purposes. No doubt, Iran's bold announcement that it intends to increase the number of centrifuges at its Natanz underground facility to 50,000 only adds to the complication. And with the US presidential elections not scheduled until next year, President Bush will be sure to keep all options on the table - including a shock-and-awe campaign that will more than rival the horrors of Hiroshima.
Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin
Canberra, Australia (Apr 17, '07)

In response to Juchechosunmanse asking me if I have no shame, the answer is I have no reason for shame. As to the charge that the US invaded two sovereign nations, first, the Taliban's Afghanistan hardly fits the description of a sovereign nation, it was more like the bastard child of the Pakistani ISI. It was only recognized by two nations, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and it was in the middle of a war to control the country. As for its moral standing, when you treat half your population as a disease and don't treat the other half that great you have no moral standing with God or decent human beings. If you don't remember what happened on September 11 [2001], I do, the Taliban harbored al-Qaeda, which attacked the United States. The US told the Taliban to surrender al-Qaeda or face attack, [and] they chose attack. The right of self-defense is guaranteed by common sense and the UN charter. As for Saddam's Iraq, it could make no claim to be a decent member of the civilized community of nations. Iraq had started two wars with its neighbors in 11 years and hundreds of thousands [were murdered] to maintain Saddam [Hussein]'s criminal regime, where tens of thousands of Iraqi children died for lack of food and medicine as Saddam spent billions on his palaces. What has happened since in Iraq [has been] caused by the extreme incompetence of the Bush administration, and the complete dysfunctionality and brutality in Iraq [has been] caused by 30 years of Saddam's murderous rule. Over 95% of the civilian deaths in Iraq are Iraqis killing each other Iraqis. This is caused by the Iraqi Sunnis, which is 20% of the population trying to maintain control over the other 80% of the population. The fact that Iraq's neighbors Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia are desperate to stop the birth of an Arab democracy and are doing every thing in their power to destroy a democratic Iraq certainly doesn't help. As to your charge that the US doesn't deal with other nations in a democratic or respectful manner, you will have to cite some examples, so I can destroy your lies with the truth. [As for calling] the United States the "ultimate bully", in Kosovo, as thousands were being killed and hundreds of thousands were forced to flee their homes by the murderous Serb regime, the US bombed a so-called Christian nation to come to the aid of the Kosovan Muslims. Please explain to me how that was amoral, and than go ask the people of Kosovo if they think the United States is a bully. If you look at the four worst countries in terms of how they treat their own citizens, countries that starve murder and torture their own citizens to maintain power for a small elite, those countries are North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan and Myanmar. The US has little to no dealings with those countries, while China is the sole or major ally of all four. I live in a country where I can sign my real name to my letters and need not hide behind a pseudonym I know what Juchechosunmanse means, why would you pick such a name, have you no shame?
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Apr 17, '07)

The Romans had a saying: "Quis custodiet custodem?" - "Who will watch the watchman?" In Paul Wolfowitz's case [The Wolf is at the exit door, Apr 14], it was the World Bank Staff Association that found the bank's president wanting in his stewardship, asking for him to step down, for not only did the association withdraw its trust in Wolfowitz, but it shone light on his venality and favoritism, especially when it came to his "squeeze" Shaha Riza. Contrite like the small boy caught with his hand in the cookie jar, Wolfowitz pleaded for a second chance. Will he get it? More likely than not, he shall. President George W Bush has a big say in the World Bank; he nominated Wolfowitz in the first to head this international banking institution as a reward for his service in pushing for war in Iraq. Others got a Medal of Honor, but the former ambassador to Indonesia got big man on the World Bank campus. Already, Wolfowitz is canvassing the bank's African members in order to keep his post. Yet Wolfowitz's plight has spread like wildfire the world over. Major newspapers are calling for him to act honorably by withdrawing gracefully from the scene. But Wolfowitz knows no shame, and he won't go unless the White House gives him the heave-ho. Which in all likelihood won't happen. In any case, Wolfowitz is seriously wounded and compromised. He is a lame duck, and his continued presence at the helm of the World Bank will further demoralize that institution.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 16, '07)

Another outstanding article by Tom Engelhardt ( The theater of the imperially absurd, Apr 13). There is no disputing the facts: the Bush administration has become the greatest threat to peace and security (such as they are) on this already miserable planet. As I read the article I could catch echoes of that last great nation that similarly attempted to conquer the world. In fact, in its co-opting of the media, in its use of fear, lies and intimidation as well as on its nearly complete emphasis on the use of military force, the Bush administration is beginning to rival the Nazis in Germany. Faced with inevitable frustration and defeat on all fronts, I shudder at what last desperate actions this rogue, failed government might have in store for the Middle East. For to paraphrase [Nazi propagandist] Joseph Goebbels: "If the day should ever come when we neo-cons must go, if some day we are compelled to leave the scene of history, we will slam the door so hard that the universe will shake and mankind will stand back in stupefaction."
Jose R Pardinas
San Diego, California (Apr 16, '07)

One has to commend Kent Ewing for his article Checkbook journalism, Chinese style [Apr 13] for his keen interest in the goings-on in China beyond his teaching duty in the International School in Hong Kong. On the other hand, his claim of there being in China journalistic "pretenders - in the hundreds of thousands" suffers from unwarranted exaggeration. As to the purported cases of company representatives handing out "red packets" of cash to journalists to solicit favorable reporting, it would be nice for him to name one company and one reporter engaged in such an act, if he cared to deepen his research effort. On reading his article further one should be disturbed to learn of an investigator of a mine accident by the name of Lan Chengzhang who was beaten to death by thugs. Tragic indeed is such a case. Mr Ewing, without detailed knowledge, callously and needlessly insinuated that Lan could have been "investigating an illegal mine, extorting money or both?". The final destination of his article is actually the bashing of the Chinese government regarding the cases of journalists Yang Bin, Ching Cheong et al. It is amusing that he goes such a long way around by first vilifying the overwhelming majority of Chinese journalists.
S P Li (Apr 16, '07)

When Pepe Escobar takes the reader on a Night bus from Baghdad [Apr 13], I can taste the fear and apprehension of the passengers. I assume the night air is cool, maybe chilly, and the Russian trucks with their military cargo batter the night with grinding shifting gears; a disturbing sound. Then comes hope in the final paragraph of Pepe's story: the "baker of Baghdad", an ambassador of sanity among all inhumanities and insanities - gracing the air with the sweet, warm smells of baking bread. Too bad men cannot confront each other with bread, not guns - breaking bread is a ceremony where one feeds the other and then breaks only a portion for himself. Considering the intimacy of such a simple ceremony, who would still desire to destroy another?
Beryl K
Minnesota, USA (Apr 13, '07)

The article Night bus from Baghdad [Apr 13] by Pepe Escobar claims that those fleeing Iraq are just innocent Iraqis. By and large this is true, but the sectarian war between the Sunnis and and Shi'as is not bound by geographical lines that separate Iraq from Syria. I have no doubt that among the refugees are Shi'a insurgents who will take the war to Syria. Though one Sunni claims that "there was never any problem in Iraq between Sunnis and Shi'ites", we must not forget the bloody eight-year war between Iran and Iraq. On the contrary, this exodus of Iraqis into Syria will only spread the sectarian war into Syria. As I stated before, the escalating war between Sunnis and Shi'as will spread to Iraq's neighboring nations. When the Sunni insurgents infiltrate Syria under the guise of being "refugees", they will carry the poison of this war to other Middle Eastern nations until one or the other sect claims victory, and Iran will help in this process.
Chrysantha Wijeyasingha
Clinton, Louisiana (Apr 13, '07)

Re Ex-generals don't want war czar job, no sir [Apr 13]: [US Vice President Richard] Cheney is finally firing [President] George Bush - taking the reins of war into his own hands. This is a putsch by the neo-cons within the Bush regime. They'll keep looking until they find someone to take the job - and their orders.
John Francis Lee
Chiang Rai, Thailand (Apr 13, '07)

Reading Ehsan Ahrari's article Ex-generals don't want war czar job, no sir (Apr 12) reminded me of a double kingship that ruled Khazaria, a powerful Jewish kingdom north of the Caucasus and between the Dnieper, the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. The kagan was king and dealt with domestic administration and foreign policy and the bek was the "military czar" with direct access to the kagan. The Mongol invasions pushed the Jewish Khazars west into the kingdom of Lithuania, which existed then from the Baltic to the Black Sea, and into Hungary, where a similar double kingship was established. Hmmm. I wonder which of [US President George W] Bush's American-Israeli-Khazarian neo-cons came up with this idea?
AAL
Canada (Apr 13, '07)

The Khazars were a Turkic people from Central Asia, many of whom converted to Judaism. Once a very powerful thorn in the flesh of the Caliphate, the Khazars began to decline around the 10th century. - ATol

Informative as Michael Scheuer's The al-Qaeda 'caravan' visits Algiers [Apr 13] may be, it lacks a historical dimension when it comes to Algeria. To put it simply, in 1991 after the Islamic Salvation Front (Front Islamiste de Salut or FIS) won a round in the parliamentary elections, the government, run by the Front de Liberation National (FLN) since Algeria's independence in June 1962, annulled the elections, thereby denying this party of moderate and radical Islamists victory at the polls, and what's more banned the FIS. As a result, the paramilitary wing of the FIS, the Groupe Islamique Arme (GIA), took to the maquis and began a guerrilla war against the central government in Algiers, under the banner of "pas de dialogue, pas de reconciliation, pas de treve" (no dialogue, no reconciliation, no truce). Seventeen years later and [after] 200,000 dead, the government offered the FIS and its army amnesty. Some accepted, others didn't. The Islamists' unconventional warfare after almost two decades, twice as long as it took the FLN to win independence from France, internal contradictions and differences of strategy and tactics have splintered the armed struggle. Thus the Groupe Salafiste pour la Predication et le Combat (GSPC) took an independent path by seeking broader support outside Algeria's borders, with al-Qaeda, to continue its struggle for an Islamic state. On one hand, joining the al-Qaeda fold indicates [that] its weakness is widespread within Algeria; on the other, it allows this band of seasoned Islamist fighters access to much-needed funds [and] arms and serves as a pole of attraction for other radical Muslims from afar to join its ranks. In sum, the recent bombings in Algiers are but a bloody page in the long quest of radical Muslims in Algeria for a place in the political sun.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 13, '07)

I refer to The al-Qaeda 'caravan' visits Algiers by Michael Scheuer (Apr 13). The first thing that comes to mind to the majority of Muslims when they hear that some bomb blast or some "suicide bombing" has taken place somewhere is that this is a false-flag operation, by either a local or a foreign secret service operating in that country. Why do we react that way? Well, first of all we are well aware that Osama bin Laden is no more. He is gone, buried probably. Besides, he never was the main motivator of terrorism. If you care to read his past statements, he made it abundantly clear that he will not target innocent people. There is no al-Qaeda, and [it is] impossible to operate across national borders and on [an] international scale - [it] just does not figure, unless you are deliberately trying to keep up the illusion of a gigantic, armed-to-the-teeth power with supernatural powers which can travel out of body and uses some sort of metaphysical energy. Second, the security and state machinery in all countries, except for the most underdeveloped countries, which don't matter in any case, is so high that no ordinary two-bit "terrorist" can plan and execute major operations such as those of New York, London, Madrid, Bali, Casablanca or Algiers. Alone the logistics of getting past all the big-brother police-state apparatuses will test the wits of even the most organized group with the most sophisticated technology, not available to nearly all the developing countries or even some European countries. The only countries that have such technology [are the United States of] America, Israel and maybe Britain. Furthermore, Muslims hate to commit suicide, as that is the worst that a Muslim can do and according to the Koran [such people] will go straight to hell. We all love life and we all want to live in peace and to be left alone in our own countries, cultures and religions. If suicide [were part of] Muslim culture, believe me, there would be no civilization left by now, because they would have blown up the whole world a long time ago. Even a child can figure out that the recent succession of bomb blasts in the countries of Maghreb and within days of each other cannot be the handiwork of "Islamic extremists" because there are none. If at all, they are carried out by local secret services with a certain political agenda, and if not by locals, then the finger points to those who want to see chaos in Muslim countries, so that they never get out of poverty and subjugation and remain in America's and Israel's "war on terror" camp. I believe in the the latter proposition.
Vincent Maadi
Cape Town, South Africa (Apr 13, '07)

So professional secret-service personnel blow themselves up? Their danger-pay supplements must be pretty impressive. - ATol

Dear Sir, In reply to the letter by Kaveh L Afrasiabi (Apr 12), I cannot understand what he finds so "nuanced" about Iran's national-security worries, which he says are behind its alleged nuclear quest. He need look no further than Israel's secret nuclear-weapons facility at Dimona that is home to an estimated 200 nuclear warheads. Moreover, unlike Iran, Israel is neither a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty nor has its Dimona facility been inspected by the International Atomic Energy Agency for over 40 years. It should therefore come as no surprise that Iran has repeatedly warned that it would strike the Israeli reactor if Israel attacks the Islamic Republic's nuclear facilities (see A systems solution to the Middle East by Sreeram Chaulia, Apr 8, '06, which is a review of the excellent book by Gawdat Bahgat titled Israel and the Persian Gulf: Retrospect and Prospect ). And in what is seen as a clear response to this threat, the Israeli government on June 26, 2004, agreed to the mass distribution of anti-radiation pills to all of Dimona's residents. Perhaps then, the gap between theology and national-security studies in the Middle East is not as huge as Mr Afrasiabi would so invariably contend.
Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin
Canberra, Australia (Apr 13, '07)

Does Dennis O'Connell have no shame? He wrote in his letter [Apr 12], "Two of the five permanent members of the Security Council, China and Russia, are both undemocratic and amoral. China continues to supply weapons to the Sudanese government to kill civilians. China is a completely amoral force on the world stage, only interested [in] its growing power and its access to energy." The role the PRC [People's Republic of China] played in Sudan is controversial at best and "amoral" at worst, but for a citizen of a country which recently invaded two sovereign nations, resulting in (directly and indirectly) bloodshed [and] the demise of tens and thousands of people to point fingers at other countries is utterly pathetic. When was the last time the US dealt with other countries in a democratic and respectful manner? And the US is not interested in growing and maintaining its power and primacy? The US has no interest in protecting its access to energy? How much more hypocrisy can one hold? If you want to find the ultimate bully and amoral power, look no further, O'Connell, you are part of it.
Juchechosunmanse
Beijing, China (Apr 13, '07)

What is the difference between [an] illegal takeover of [a] children's library by [students] of Jamia Hafsa and [the] illegal/unconstitutional takeover of Pakistan by General Pervez Musharraf? Can anyone answer?
Mr Concerned (Apr 13, '07)

[US President George W] Bush is a dismal failure in his war on terror: 700,000 graves of innocent Iraqis [and] Afghanis, hundreds of trillions of dollars lost to taxpayers; Iraq [and] Afghanistan ruined to ashes then made a business opportunity to plunder [oil] resources; bloody sectarian killings triggered only escalated freedom struggles or installed pro-Iranian traitors in Iraq. Bush [and British Prime Minister Tony] Blair should resign to facilitate a fresh strategy to solve these quagmires.
Abdullah Jamal Mohammad
Jehlum, Pakistan (Apr 13, '07)

Re Pakistan: Trouble in the mosque [Apr 12]: A wag with a whimsical sense of history of the Indian subcontinent might see a similarity in the unlikely pairing of Delhi's Lal Qil (Red Fort) with Masjid Lal or Red Mosque in Pakistan's capital city Islamabad. The former, the palace and the seat of power of the Mughal emperors, the last of whom, Bahadur Shah Zahar, embraced what is variously called the First War of Indian Independence or the Sepoy Uprising of 1857. That war ended with defeat at the hands of the British Army. The latter is the seat and symbol of the power of radical Islamists, kindled to a fiery passion by the sons of the Baloch Maulana Abdullah, Abdul Aziz and Ghazi Abdul Rashid. The mosque's madrassas - Jamia Hafsa for boys and Jamia Hafsa for girls - have openly challenged the Musharraf government by calling for the immediate imposition of sharia law with the country. Glowing with the rectitude of the righteous, they do not shy away from kidnapping, nor in squads of "vice and virtue" do they hesitate in menacing with violence shopkeepers who peddle music and videos which they deem unfit for true believers. Like London's Finsbury Park mosque, renowned for its fiery clerics, the Red Mosque is a magnet for Islamic fanatics. At present, the Musharraf government has issued a writ which the Maulan brothers have ignored. Yet it is quite apparent that the mosque's flag of defiance is a call to action against the government. The religious facade nonetheless covers the multitude of causes - economic, political, social and religious, and military - which has plagued Pakistan since its creation in 1947. It is worthy of note that this threat to the central government comes from Balochs who represent the most backward-looking and lawless elements in Pakistan, who hunger for a mythical Muslim past which is more Arab than the shining glory of the early Mughal emperors. The Red Mosque is an open threat to the civilian-cum-military government in Islamabad, and as such might meet the same fate [as] the Red Fort, or lead to a festering civil war a l'algerienne.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 12, '07)

Syed Saleem Shahzad: Given what you have written on April 12 [Pakistan: Trouble in the mosque] about the Red Mosque and its intricate connections to radical Islam and what is going on with the Indonesian Parliament looking at passing elements of sharia law, there will be a match that will light this flame in Asia, I truly believe - like a match on the oilfields. I hope you are taking care of yourself, as I think you could very well be seen as Exhibit A while writing for a major media outlet, no matter how you portray what is going on - an occupational hazard you have probably contemplated often. Your voice is important if the West is to understand what is going on - which too many of us don't in our bubble.
C A Morrison
Williamsburg, Virginia (Apr 12, '07)

In Noam Chomsky's Rulers and the ruled: Dangerous disconnect [Apr 12] we are again treated to Mr Chomsky's warped left-wing view of the world. He compares the US and Iran and perceives them both as equality undemocratic. He mentions Iranians working for a democratic Iran such as Akbar Ganji but does not tell of his six-year imprisonment for attending a conference in Berlin. He also makes sure not to mention the Canadian-Iranian journalist Zahra Kazemi who was raped, tortured and murdered by the Iranian government, who would not even allow her family to bury her according to their wishes. Perhaps Mr Chomsky would like to give us a list of his left-wing buddies who were treated the same way by the FBI [US Federal Bureau of Investigation]. Mr Chomsky seems to imply Iran has every right to send weapons into Iraq to kill Americans, but later tells us that the UN should control foreign weapons sales. Evidently Mr Chomsky is willing to make an exception if the weapons are used to kill Americans. Mr Chomsky has the common left-wing fantasy about the UN as some sort of savior for the world. Perhaps he should go to Darfur and hold a dying child and tell him how the UN will save him, or perhaps he could go to Rwanda and tell the piles of human bones some of his other fantasies. Several years ago there was a vote in the UN to condemn the latest outrage from North Korea, which is the essence of evil. The vote was something like 86 against North Korea, 23 abstentions, and 63 nations voting with North Korea. If the UN is equally split on a question like North Korea, no right-thinking person can have any respect for such an institution. Two of the five permanent members of the Security Council, China and Russia, are both undemocratic and amoral. China continues to supply weapons to the Sudanese government to kill civilians. China is a completely amoral force on the world stage, only interested [in] its growing power and its access to energy. American threats of force against Iran are to warn Iran the US will not allow a nuclear-armed Iran. The only people who don't believe Iran is trying to build a bomb are children, leftists and fools. I can assure Mr Chomsky the 72-hour bombing campaign against Iran will not spark World War III, and I look forward to Kaveh Afrasiabi's spin on the destruction of Iran's navy, air force and air defenses as a great victory for Iran - may I suggest the title "Iranian buildings destroy American bombs"?
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Apr 12, '07)

One way to deal more efficiently with the issues presented by David Gosset [A new world with Chinese characteristics] and Noam Chomsky [Rulers and the ruled: Dangerous disconnect, both Apr 12], among others, might be to relocate the headquarters of the UN from New York City to Hong Kong.
T Sullivan
USA (Apr 12, '07)

In Muqtada raises the stakes in Iraq (Apr 11), Sami Moubayed says, "Neither [Ibrahim al-]Jaafari, however, nor [Nuri al-]Maliki was able to stop this abuse of government office practiced publicly by the SCIRI. Al-Zamman reported that more than 2,500 people have been killed, execution-style, over the past six months, most of them Sunnis. It also quotes an official at the Baghdad morgue saying that he had received 16,000 bodies over the past 12 months, all murdered with signs of torture. The only people to blame for the continued bloodshed are Maliki and Muqtada." I do not see why he holds Muqtada [al-Sadr] responsible for the doings of SCIRI [the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq].
Rowan Berkeley (Apr 12, '07)

In response to Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin (letter, Apr 11), I cannot argue with a mindset settled so firmly in its false assumptions, eg that Iran seeks nuclear bombs for its "apocalyptic destination: Jerusalem", or that it seeks "Islamic nuclear hegemony in the Middle East", etc. The good reverend echoes the editorials of the Jerusalem Post, and should consult the dissenting views of experts in Israel itself, such as a recent study showing that despite its rhetoric, Iran has a much more nuanced foreign policy and its national-security worries are behind its alleged nuclear quest. But, of course, there is a huge gap between theology and national-security studies, and the reverend needs a little education on the latter.
Kaveh L Afrasiabi (Apr 12, '07)

Re your reply to the letter by Dennis Atwood (Apr 10): I like your magazine and look at it practically daily and wish every day that you have lots of new articles of the same quality and with somewhat even more neutrality. You are quite neutral, but sometimes one feels there is a little more anti-American color than there ought to be. Perhaps it is not so much your policy, it is just that your collection of writers and their leanings, though most write very well, may be giving such a color. Maybe it [will] change with a few more additions. But what I admired most was in your reply [that] you are just five managing this whole magazine. Indeed a very admirable effort. I wish you all the good luck for the continuation [of] your efforts.
Soumya Srajan
Mumbai, India (Apr 12, '07)

The "five" in our note referred only to the newsdesk in Hua Hin, Thailand, as a direct response to Dennis Atwood's points. We do also have a couple of technical and administrative people on staff in Hua Hin, as well as very small staffs in Bangkok and Hong Kong. - ATol

Re A win, win, win ending for Tehran [Apr 11] by Kaveh L Afrasiabi: Aha! Someone has finally said it - and from the forum of the worldwide press, to boot - that it is long past the time for the common folks in the UN General Assembly to go their own way, something which I and, I am sure, millions of other people on this planet have believed for a very long time. The United Nations has never been what it was represented to be at its beginning. Whatever the details and/or intrigue in the recent Shatt-al-Arab episode, it has, as did the buildup to the invasion of Iraq, demonstrated to all of us that Britain and America are the last two countries in the world that should be allowed to have a primary influence on the decisions of this world body. The latter has proved to be a big, bumbling, lying, schoolyard bully, motivated by power-lust and greed; and the former its groveling lap-dog. The recent threat by the US to refuse the president of Iran a visa so that he might attend a UN meeting in New York regarding sanctions on his country was/is pathetically indicative of this. I urge the members of the Non-Aligned Movement and, indeed, any members of the General Assembly who are agreed to call an extracurricular "convention" in a place such as the Azores, Kazakhstan or Tierra del Fuego to discuss a move to a less "polluted" environment; and should the blessing of reorganization occur, primary consideration be given to (ordinary) people power. My congratulations to Mr Afrasiabi for writing this article and to ATol for printing it.
Keith E Leal
Pincher Creek, Alberta (Apr 11, '07)

Re A win, win, win ending for Tehran (Apr 11): I cannot help but consider this whole substandard article by Kaveh L Afrasiabi a cheap shot at the West vis-a-vis its strategic relation to Iran in the wake of the hostage crisis involving 15 British sailors. What escapes Afrasiabi's attention is that Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad timed his announcement over Iran's ability to produce enriched uranium at "industrial scale" to coincide with the first anniversary of Iran joining the highly prestigious club of the world's nuclear producers. This leaves us with little doubt that the whole crisis was manufactured by Iran to not so much establish a diplomatic coup over the West, but to act as a backdrop to this next milestone in Iran's dogged pursuit of an Islamic nuclear hegemony in the Middle East region. Moreover, the announcement was reportedly accompanied by the ringing of bells in schools across the nation to bring home the message that the next generation of young Iranians will carry their country's nuclear aspirations all the way to its apocalyptic destination: Jerusalem. This is why Afrasiabi's contention that the West now needs to have a "more balanced" approach towards Iran that is more European than American is irrelevant and misses the point. What is relevant is the fact that nuclear weapons are still the world's most favored weapon of choice and absolutely no amount of diplomatic posturing can eliminate the need to address this diabolical scourge on the conscience of human civilization.
Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin
Canberra, Australia (Apr 11, '07)

Re The chimera of Arab solidarity [Apr 11]: M K Bhadrakumar sniffs at the meetings of Arab kings and presidents in Riyadh who reaffirmed the principles in the Saudi-inspired Arab Peace Initiative [API]. Yet the gathering in the Saudi capital showed a moment of Arab unity, fragile that it may be. And that in a way is something, for these very states fight and kiss and make up and then squabble again as though they were a big family, and in a way they are, united by language and custom and mostly by religion, but tempered in a strong streak of nationalism. The API is not a chimera, for it seeks to aid in the recognition of a Palestinian state and come to terms with Israel within the boundaries of the 1967 borders through diplomacy. It has more substance than President [George W] Bush's "roadmap". Arab wars against Israel have brought regime change and defeat and to some dishonor. No state is willing to take up arms again; each has within its own borders trouble enough with Islamic fundamentalists and serious socio-economic disparities which have festered for long years. The Arab world and street are not happy with the "martyrdom" of captive Palestine nor with the active neglect of Washington, which favors the interests of Israel over theirs. It is highly simplistic to say, well, yes, the Saudi king is in America's corner, but how do you account for [the fact that] King Abdullah condemned Mr Bush's war in Iraq? For sure, there is an identity of interests between Washington and Riyadh, but there are also differences. And the Saudi king's condemnation has the weight of his prestige and the wealth of his country behind him, not to say that he expresses a common standpoint which other Arab heads of state may say in meetings with American officials but are hardly fit for the public ear. The king's words raise the sword of Sunni Islam and have made Tehran more respectful in its maneuvers in neighboring countries. The question of Palestine is at once the great unifier of Arab states as well as its divider as to the way to bring a just and equitable solution to the Palestinian people. Therefore the Riyadh meeting is significant in that it brought a public face to Arab unity, on one hand, and on the other, these very same Arab states must forcefully pressure Washington to a more even-handed and neutral position towards Israel, to right the wrongs to the Palestine people.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 11, '07)

The article Maoists face up to political reality [Apr 11] deals with some of the highly topical issues that have been discussed very seriously among [Nepal]'s intelligentsia. Dhruba Adhikary's highly analytical write-up touches upon three fundamental dilemmas that Nepal is caught up in today. First, as Adhikary has rightly pointed out, though somewhat obliquely, the Maoists' decision to join the interim government is nothing but their political long shot under the garb of their equivocal political phraseology "competitive politics" with an ultimate aim of seizing power and converting Nepal into a totalitarian communist state. It is simply a change of their strategy and not the change of their objective. The leaders of the Seven-Party Alliance cannot shy away from shouldering the responsibility of pushing the country [on to] such a precipice. The second issue that Adhikary has succinctly dealt with is how illegal immigrants from adjoining India are being awarded Nepali citizenship. For the sake of shortsighted political advantages, Nepal's myopic leaders have betrayed the nation by precipitating a drastic change in the country's demographic balance. At the behest of India's political strategists, Nepali politicians have been conceding to what the so-called "Madhesi" hooligans have been demanding. The third point that impressed me in the article is the ultimate question of legitimacy of the resurrected Parliament to alter the political characteristic of the country and declare it a secular state without having carried out any exercise in which the people of Nepal could have their say.
Swayambhu Man Amatya
Kathmandu, Nepal (Apr 11, '07)

Commenting on the excellent article Was it really Pelosi in Damascus? [Apr 6], President [George W] Bush has expressed his annoyance and criticism at [US House of Representatives Speaker] Nancy Pelosi's visit to Syria for being unhelpful and not representative of Bush administration policy and views. [US Vice President] Dick Cheney accused her of "bad behavior" and said: "She does not speak for the United States." President Bush is feeling irritated and feeling the itch because she met President [Bashar al-]Assad, trespassing on the territory usually reserved for the [US] president. She was given five-star treatment and welcomed enthusiastically by the Syrians. But the fact of the matter is that Ms Pelosi traveling to Syria demonstrated Mr Bush's dwindling popularity, waning authority, dithering domestic policy and miserably failing foreign policy. Mr Bush is facing a challenge to his authority with the resurgent Democrats trying to run a parallel foreign policy from Capitol Hill, threatening to cut off spending on the war on Iraq unless President Bush sets a deadline to bring American troops back home ... I should not be surprised if Nancy Pelosi takes more foreign missions to repair the tremendous damage done to the US's image abroad in the last six years.
Saqib Khan
UK (Apr 11, '07)

Syed Saleem Shahzad: You seem to have an excellent grip on Pakistani affairs and clearly have some good contacts with the Taliban too. I tried to look up your other articles but it seems that you exclusively write for Asia Times [Online]. I could not find any article by you in any Pakistani paper. A little research showed that you work for a Pakistani paper, The Star. Since that paper has no website, I called the people in the Dawn Group, owners of the paper, and they told me that The Star is a small evening paper and concentrates on local Karachi issues. The interesting part was that the sub-editor of Dawn I talked to claimed that they don't have anyone who works for Asia Times. There are no Asia Times offices in Karachi or in the Dawn Group premises. My questions to you: (1) Why is a person of your knowledge and understanding of Pakistani issues not allowed space in Pakistan's print media? (2) Why do mainstream Pakistani media never reproduce your articles? (3) Did you ever work for any major newspaper in Pakistan, or is The Star the only newspaper you worked for in Pakistan? (4) Per the Dawn Group claims, you don't write political articles for The Star? (5) Is Saleem Shahzad your assumed name?
Peter Hoss
Los Angeles, California (Apr 11, '07)

I started my career at The Star and was later its chief correspondent. I did contribute to Dawn but to its Economic and Business Review section, as earlier I was only a commerce writer. A few of my articles are still on the Web. Asia Times Online was the second level of my career and I decided to stick with that. Nevertheless, The Daily Times, The News International and The Nation regularly reproduced my work, and once the editor of one of them wrote to me of how he was lunged on by the Pakistan armed forces' Inter-Services Public Relations Department when he quoted my work, and then instructions were sent to all that nobody would reproduce or quote my work in the newspapers. Still, some newspapers occasionally reproduce some parts of my work. Many offers come my way from Pakistani publications to write for them if I would make major compromises, as no Pakistani newspaper wants to rock the boat. That's why I chose to write for Asia Times Online, which demands no such compromises. Syed Saleem Shahzad is the name on my national ID card, passport, educational degrees and everywhere. - Syed Saleem Shahzad

I refer to Jim Lobe's article [Iran takes the wind out of US sails, Apr 6]. Fifteen British sailors, who had no right to be in Middle East at all, were captured by the Iranians while intruding in Iran's territorial waters. From the first day the Iranians treated them in accordance with laws of war and peace as laid down in the Koran. They were treated with respect as guests, provided good accommodation, food, and all the hospitality that the Islamic tradition demands. Contrary to what they might be urged to say by the British military now that they are freed, there is no doubt that they were treated with kindness and traditional Islamic hospitality. No orange jumpsuits, no barbed wire, no hoods, no electric shocks, no dogs let loose on them, no sodomy, no rape, no wild and threatening statements and no steroid-fed soldiers leading them on a leash! Contrast that with Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and Baghram in Afghanistan and you can see which culture is civilized. Announcing the release of the British sailors, [Mahmud] Ahmadinejad, president of Iran, said: "On the occasion of the birthday of the great Prophet [Mohammed] ... and for the occasion of the passing of Christ, I say the Islamic Republic government and the Iranian people - with all powers and legal right to put the soldiers on trial - forgave those 15," referring to the Muslim Prophet's birthday on March 30 and the Easter holiday. "This pardon is a gift to the British people," he said. Compare that with the utterances and actions of warmongers such as [US President George W] Bush, [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair, [US Vice President Richard] Cheney, [Likud leader Benjamin] Netanyahu, [Israeli Prime Minister Ehud] Olmert and [former prime minister Ariel] Sharon. These warmongers have by their words and deeds brought wars, massacres, starvation, rape, torture and hatred to the world. [The United States of] America has been involved in around 100 conflicts since its birth; Israel has made wars with all its neighbors and has murdered tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Palestine, Lebanon and Syria. Britain, France and Russia have caused the deaths of millions of people through their colonialist conquests. Iran has never invaded any country and neither have the currently American-occupied countries Somalia [and] Afghanistan invaded any other countries. Iraq under Saddam [Hussein] instigated by America and as America's client invaded Iran and Kuwait; prior to that, Iraq had a history of invading neighboring countries. If these wars are to be ended and mankind is to live in peace, the Western world will have to listen to former Iranian president [Mohammad] Khatami and support his "dialogue of civilizations".
Vincent Maadi
Cape Town, South Africa (Apr 10, '07)

The UN Security Council has imposed sanctions against Iran over its failure to halt uranium enrichment. Many people had questions earlier before 15 British sailors were released: Does Iran try to use this incident to divert attention from its nuclear development? How can the situation be defused to ensure the return of the captured personnel secured? However, I am inclined to think why Iran chose to capture British sailors, instead of Americans. Does Iran retain the ability to strike at Western interests when it feels sufficiently provoked [as] the article Iran takes the wind out of US sails (Apr 6) mentioned? The US captured five Iranians in a raid some time ago and are still holding them. The Bush administration went even further to authorize the US military to kill or capture Iranian military and intelligence operatives inside Iraq. Nevertheless, Iran dare not provoke the US. Why? This is not an enigma. America has a strong force in the region and Iran understands the serious consequences [it] may face. Actually, America would have launched a strike against Iran had the British sailors been detained longer. What does history teach us? In 1980, Americans lost confidence in their leader - Jimmy Carter (the one who likes to talk peace all the time) because of the Iranian hostage crisis. In 2004, eight British personnel were held for three days by Iran. Therefore, this is not the first time that Iran targeted Britain. Recently, Tony Blair's announcement to reduce British troop levels in Iraq by 1,600 within a matter of months may have sent out a wrong signal. While the US is still fighting hard against terrorists in Iraq, [for the] UK to pull back troops unilaterally in Iraq seems to tell the world that its link to the US is [weaker]. Is there honorable and lasting peace which is based on weakness on the part of the Allies - the US and UK? History has dictated [that] military weakness in the Western world encourages potential enemies. In contrast, its collective armed strength is the greatest guarantee for peace. Would Britain be able to re-fight the Falklands War if Argentina invaded the islands tomorrow? The British government must learn the lesson and rethink [its] current military strength. By all means, it is [in] Britain's power to make it extremely unlikely that this should happen again ...
Hong-Lok Li (Apr 10, '07)

The article Iran takes the wind out of US sails [Apr 6] states that Iran [was sending messages that it] "retains the ability to strike at Western interests when it feels sufficiently provoked" and secondly "when Western powers engage Iran with respect and as an equal, they are more likely to get what they want". The first part is obvious. No one doubts that Iran can strike back at the West and the West can do the same to Iran. In fact Tehran has been boasting about its ability to strike at its opponents ever since it embarked on its nuclear program, even to the extent of threatening to annihilate Israel and strike at the Western interests in the Middle East and elsewhere, which by the way it has been doing to date. Its second message, that the Iranian regime should be treated "with respect", works both ways. Iran has demonstrated utter contempt of Israel and the US coalition. If Iran wants to be treated with respect and, as illogical as it may sound, as an equal partner, then common sense would dictate that Iran should do likewise towards Israel, the Western powers and the UN. To date it has not done any of it. Diplomacy may work regarding the 15 British soldiers, but if Iran were to follow through [with its] threats, all diplomatic channels would be shut and open warfare may be the likely result.
Chrysantha Wijeyasingha
Clinton, Louisiana (Apr 10, '07)

Re Iran takes the wind out of US sails (Apr 6): The announcement by Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad that the 15 British sailors were being released as a "gift" in honor of the Prophet Mohammed's forthcoming birthday and the Christian Easter holiday provides a most potent symbol of relations between Islam and the West. Muslims believe that Jesus Christ did neither die on the cross nor rise from the dead. Moreover, they believe that the Prophet Mohammed was the one whom Jesus himself had prophesied would come after him as God's final revelation to the world. These inherent contradictions are what make our celebration of the Easter story in the West a complete anathema to the Islamic world, in particular the Christian affirmation that the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is a vindication of his divine sonship. With the recent military buildup of US warships in the Persian Gulf, President Ahmadinejad has no doubt seized this golden opportunity to offer a finely balanced diplomatic gesture to the British people. However, the one thing he cannot disguise is the fact that his Easter "gift" comes at a most costly price: Iran's unimpeded pursuit of becoming a world nuclear power.
Reverend Dr Vincent Zankin
Canberra, Australia (Apr 10, '07)

I would have thought that the MOD [British Ministry of Defense] could have been a bit more dignified in trying to get its political point across than relying upon the commercial approach to allow the marines to sell their stories [about their captivity in Iran]. I believe that this maneuver is too late to repair the damage done to their inadequacy and has lost the plot. I am glad, though, that the 15 British captives were freed by Tehran as an Easter gift to the British people. The arrest of 15 British naval personnel was a clear message and warning to the Americans currently engaged in military buildup in the [Persian] Gulf for a possible future aerial attack on Iran: "Don't think about attacking us." It was also a clear message to the Europeans to expect trouble if the West continues to pressure it to give up its legal and justified right to pursue peaceful nuclear technology. The announcement of the release of the Britons came a day after the release of an Iranian diplomat who was kidnapped in Iraq, most probably by US forces. The sudden release of the 15 British sailors, which signaled a peaceful end to the crisis, was a clear sign that the Iranian regime is not a "hardliner" as the West claims, which may encourage Europeans to engage in real diplomatic talks with Iran to end the standoff over its nuclear program "diplomatically". Iran seems to have already achieved some of its objectives. Until this crisis, Iran had been on the diplomatic guillotine with United Nations Security Council imposing a new sanctions to punish the regime for continuation with its nuclear program. Even the Russians seemed to be dithering with [Iranian President Mahmud] Ahmadinejad's persistent defiance, but he must be never be underestimated. He has regained some kind of diplomatic initiative in presenting himself after the release of the 15 British naval personnel as a man of peace and diplomacy, and also won global prestige and respect. He targeted the weakest, the United Kingdom, and exposed its helplessness. He knew very well that military action by the British was forgone ... and could only be initiated by the USA and Zionist Israel in collaboration. He knew Britain's rules of engagement and diplomatic isolation and made brave calculations to harass the weakest link and getting away from this episode with a [checkmate] of Tony Blair. There was a time in colonial history when British citizens were afforded gunboat protection from foreign harassment. In 1868, [when] the king of Abyssinia interned two British diplomats, a force of 13,000 British troops was sent on the rescue mission and punish to extinction the culprits. In 1850, when Britain blockaded Piraeus in order to secure compensation to rescue a Portuguese moneylender born in Gibraltar, the British government assured its people that "a British subject, in whatever land he may be, shall feel confident that a watchful eye and the strong arm of England will protect him from injustice and wrong". Not anymore ...
Saqib Khan
UK (Apr 10, '07)

Re Was it really Pelosi in Damascus? (Apr 6): What an interesting piece by Sami Moubayed. It is difficult for me to give any credit to [US President George W] Bush for anything, but Mr Moubayed's reasoning is viable. It would probably represent the first time the Bush administration has used duplicity for the greater good. I wouldn't be so strident as to say that its intention is to do good. More likely its intention is to save face and perhaps begin to surreptitiously remove itself from a the edge of an Iranian cataclysm it has backed itself into. But any time BushCo uses diplomacy - even through deception - it is an extremely hopeful sign. Certainly Bush's political minister, Karl Rove, is more skilled than anyone at such smoke and mirrors, and if he suggested the move, it probably would be the first time his actions weren't designed to destroy Democrats and vilify enemies - at least half of it, anyway. I hope I don't awaken to an attack on Iran and eat my words of half-praise.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Apr 10, '07)

Re Was it really Pelosi in Damascus? [Apr 6]: George W Bush huffed and puffed at Speaker of the [US] House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi's meeting Syria's Bashir al-Assad. His partisans have shouted from the roofs of the Capitol that Mme Pelosi and her band of Democrats are overstepping the constitutional boundaries of the division of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government, by forging a foreign policy of their own. Had they forgotten a lesson from a middle-school science class: nature abhors a vacuum? And in this case, the vacuum is the hollowness of Mr Bush's foreign policy in the Middle East. And so the Speaker of the House has stepped in to fill the void. Mme Pelosi deals with the here and now. Her visit to Israel, Syria, and Saudi Arabia is a test in reality, and limns an approach to save the United States from Mr Bush's Waterloo in Iraq, thereby preserving a degree of respect for America's interest in that part of the world. Although she has chanted the mantra of eternal support of Israel, she surely has had to whisper in Premier Ehud Olmert's ear that a Democratic president may want more flexibility on [Israel]'s part on the question of a Palestinian state, illegal Jewish settlements on the West Bank, and coming to terms with Syria, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. Will she be held a hostage to Israeli interests as Mr Bush is when he has to delay if not modify supply Saudi Arabia with arms shipments, a Saudi Arabia [to] which the Bush family has very close ties, and [to] whose princely representatives President Bush returns kisses on their two cheeks, as a measure of closeness the Bush family and the Saudi royal family enjoy? By going to Damascus, Mme Pelosi has shown a sophisticated grasp of geopolitics. On one hand, she is acknowledging the millennia-old role of Syria in the Middle East; on the other, the warm response by President Assad to the game of traditional diplomacy which [US Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice spurns. Mme Pelosi has made a big stride during her visit to the Middle East. Let's hope that when her party has won the White House in 2009, which given the way Mr Bush and his Republican Party are falling like tin soldiers by the wayside is more than a sure bet, the new president will be more even-handed and bolder in approach in the very unstable Middle East [where] President Bush under the sheepskin of bringing democracy has done untold damage.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 10, '07)

Re Was it really Pelosi in Damascus? [Apr 6] by Sami Moubayed: It's not about the disagreements in Washington. Israel denied that [US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy] Pelosi relayed a message to Syria from the prime minister. Pelosi is delusional. It's not about [US President George W] Bush, it's not the war in Iraq or US foreign policy. Muslims hated Americans before the war. They danced in the streets on [September 11, 2001]. They celebrated the death of Americans. Hate is the problem in the Middle East. Jews hate Palestinians and Palestinians hate Jews. Two groups who claim to serve a god of love just hate. The Middle East blames the US for the problem and they hate us. Muslim Shi'ites hate Muslim Sunnis and the Sunnis hate the Shi'ites. Neither peace negotiations nor changes in US foreign policy will ever bring peace to the Middle East. Only the haters can bring peace.
Buddy Bayne
Human Political Analyst
Greenville, South Carolina (Apr 10, '07)

There are no doubt many historical as well as beautiful traditional Chinese mansions and historical homes in Beijing worth preserving re Saving Beijing's historic neighborhoods [Apr 6] but one must also accept that these old hutong neighborhoods occupy land far too valuable and needed for modern homes and businesses. Between the needs of tens of thousands and the sentiments of a family or two, the needs of the majority must prevail. My solution [would] be for the formation of an business enterprise that [would] identify these "doomed" houses and offer them for sale in the open market and preferably on the Internet. That enterprise would undertake to dismantle the house in a way that it could be reassembled elsewhere and restored to the original architecture. Preferably the building should be restored somewhere else in China, as in a special housing zone containing the best of traditional Chinese-style mansions and houses, or in a poor village that will welcome rich Chinese who wish to stay in such houses. Else these same buildings should be exportable to another country where there is likely a demand from rich overseas Chinese or from foreigners who may want to have a distinctive house different from the cookie-cutter Western-style architecture.
Kelvin Mok
Canada (Apr 10, '07)

Bravo to Tony Karon for his excellent article Condi's free ride in the Middle East (Apr 5). It is about time someone blew the whistle on the [US] secretary of state. The problem with the Bush administration and its former national security adviser, now Secretary of State [Condoleezza] Rice, is that in the last six years, they have continuously mistaken motion for action. They think moving around the Middle East and putting a happy face on it will be a substitute for achievement. A good example is Secretary Rice's last trip, its "4 + 2 + 4 math" and traveling to all the capitals except where it matters the most - Syria and Iran. The truth is, the Bush administration and its neo-con fellow-traveler supporters are so blinded by so much ideology that they are incapable of understanding what it takes to bring peace to the Middle East. How else do you explain the cynical and calculated White House criticism of House Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi's trip to Syria, which ironically was encouraged by the acting president of Israel and the prime minister of that country? These actions partially explain the delusional, dysfunctional Middle East policy of the last six years which has brought nothing but unmitigated disaster to the region and to US security interests. To reverse this, the US must engage in regional diplomacy. It must start with unconditional, bilateral talks with Syria and Iran, based on mutual respect. The recent release of the British naval personnel by Iran shows that kind of diplomacy works - a lesson that must be learned by the Bush administration. And at the same time, there must be a robust effort to resolve the Palestinian/Israeli dispute based on a viable Palestinian state and a secure Israel. Unfortunately, the Bush administration has been loath to engage in such diplomacy, and as long as that continues, so will the death and destruction [that have] become the hallmark of its policy in the Middle East.
Fariborz S Fatemi
McLean, Virginia (Apr 10, '07)

Re The 'X' dreams of Washington's wonks [Apr 4]: Thanks are due Leon Hadar (and ATol) for detailing the career paths described by foreign-policy "wonks" in Washington. The only salient element Mr Hadar omits is the role played by political organizations of AIPAC's [American Israel Public Affairs Committee] type, but one should perhaps take care not to bite all the hands that feed one. Still, Mr Hadar's revelations hardly come as a surprise. As the Swedish statesman Axel Oxenstierna observed to his son Johan, when the latter, who had been appointed to negotiate for Sweden, doubted his ability to parley with Europe's leading statesmen, "An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur" ["Do you not know, my son, with how little sense the world is run?"]. The situation doesn't seem to have changed materially these last three and a half centuries.
M Henri Day, PhD, MD
Stockholm, Sweden (Apr 10, '07)

You need to tell Herr Professor Doktor Spengler to cool his ardor to make generalizations about Jews and Jewish culture, because this is unseemly ... I found his [Apr 3] tirade offensive for saying: "Jewish food generally is unappetizing as well as visually unappealing, as opposed to Japan's magnificent national cuisine; Jewish manners are brusque, while Japan has made an art form of courtesy; and no aspect of Jewish religious life is concerned with visual beauty in any way at all" [Cherry blossoms, the beautiful and the good]. These remarks result from the fact that Herr Spengler doesn't know any Jews because most of the ones who used to live in Deutschland were murdered. Jewish food is both appetizing and visually appealing, to the extent that the food of the local goyim whose culinary ideas the Jews copied was often enhanced by the Kosher cook. Give me a real Jewish Wienerschnitzel any day over one von Schwein by a Christian cook. Jewish manners are typically European, which is actually rather nice. The ones with the brusque ways are Israelis responding to some inner demon of their own. Visual beauty in Judaism starts with the writing of the Torah scrolls. And at this time of year, I think it might be wise for the Guter Herr Spengler to take a gander at a Haggadah, the traditional printed book with the rites of the Passover Seder in it. He might even find an antique version from the Vaterland (16th century, Rhineland) available for view. The Jewish esthetic is not Leni Riefenstahl or No theatre, but we can claim Habima and Eisenstadt. Forget sushi, which is served in Kosher versions at most Jewish functions these days. But has Spengler ever eaten my Matzo Kloeschen? While we have problems with [Richard] Wagner, what of [Felix] Mendelssohn? No, it wasn't the goyim who produced [Camille] Pisarro and [Amedeo] Modigliani, Jakob Epstein and Peggy Guggenheim. I think we need to get [Spengler] to stop his dangerous habit of generalizing about Jews. We know what it can lead to.
Vivian Lewis (Apr 10, '07)

Syed Saleem Shahzad: I just read your story on Lal Masjid [Pakistan's man in the middle, Apr 3]. It's excellent. I admire your reporting skills ... I was looking for the background of this story and I found it clearly in your report ...
Bushra Khan (Apr 10, '07)

If Iraq wants to curb sectarian tensions, there needs too be a better leader like Iyad Allawi. The USA needs to get rid of (kill) Muqtada al-Sadr and Ayatollah Ali Sistani. Both are evil men. They are the cause of 100% of the sectarian tension. Allawi stated for Iraq, "Security first, democracy second." There will be no peace as long as Iran keeps butting in. One or two smart bombs might get their attention? Think so? I know it will.
Bob Jumper (Apr 10, '07)

Your banner notice on April 5 declares that you are taking a holiday and your next edition will be April 10. Acknowledging that, as a private enterprise, you have the right to do so, the fact that this time-out is sandwiched around Easter, the most sacred of Christian observances, is odd because: (1) Christianity is a minority religion in the part of the globe on which your coverage is concentrated, being as it is the "home" of Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism [and] Jainism, and that Indonesia has the world's largest Muslim population; (2) tens of thousands of readers around the world rely on AT Online for authoritative and incisive, even provocative, coverage of key politico-economic and international security issues; and (3) your staff/contributors include folks named Moubayed, Bhadrakumar, Chaulia, Aiyar, Au, Afrasiabi, Liu, etc, many of whom I would suppose are capable of keeping [Asia Times Online] up and running 24/7/365. So I am hoping that you will adopt a policy of no more extended "time-offs", and will develop staff to be capable of keeping your valuable, even essential, enterprise operating virtually continuously.
Dennis Atwood (Apr 10, '07)

Thanks for the kind words, but you're misguided about keeping ATol up and running at all times. The people you mention are fine freelance writers but they don't have the editorial or technological knowhow to run this website. And for the five of us who do, it was either a holiday over Easter (which is also a holiday for the majority of our readers), or this coming weekend, the four-day Songkran [New Year] in Thailand. Unlike our competitors, we don't have an editorial desk teeming with people keen to stand in for us. - ATol

Re Chinese heat is on US sweatshop lobby [Apr 5]: Rather than a national conflict between China, on the one hand, and the US or the so-called "West", on the other, as portrayed in our corporate media, what we [currently] observe is a class conflict between labor and capital on a global scale. It's about time this fact was generally recognized - perhaps the article by [Brendan] Smith, [Tim] Costello and [Jeremy] Brecher can here make a difference. In any event, ATol is to be congratulated on its publication.
M Henri Day, PhD, MD
Stockholm, Sweden (Apr 5, '07)

Big congratulations to Asia Times [Online] for your superb analyses of the crisis in the Persian Gulf. The contributions by [Pepe] Escobar and [Kaveh L] Afrasiabi [US dangles tempting bait for Iran, Apr 5] filled a huge gap in our understanding of the background, causes, and effects of this crisis. Once again the US and Canadian media failed the test with their unapologetic and one-sided commentaries which defended the European side. I urge Asia Times [Online] writers to write articles about how the Western media failed [their] own principles and what lessons we can learn about the pathetic state of our "free media" when all you read in the editorials of newspapers like the Washington Post and New York Times was about how wrong the Iranians were and how correct the British government. It was absolutely sickening to see the deluge under the cover of a free and independent press.
Tim Bowen
Toronto, Ontario (Apr 5, '07)

The failure of corporate mainstream media to cover the events in the Middle East with what used to be ordinary journalistic standards of balance, thoroughness, courage and accuracy is well known to Asia Times Online readers, which is a major reason that our little publication has such a large and growing core of supporters. There would still seem, however, to be a far larger core of people who simply don't care that they are not being well informed. See for example Tom Engelhardt's A bombshell that nobody heard (Mar 15). - ATol

Alex Au casts a stone-cold-sober eye on Singapore's ministers' pay packets. Au's website (www.yawningbread.org) contains tabular material which, perhaps owing to space on ATol, is absent in Singapore's 'fat cat' ministers to get fatter [Apr 5], though the import of his data is not sacrificed. Singapore is run like a corporation. In its 40 years or so as an independent city-state, it has made strides from a Third World to a First World economy. It [was] with much pride that [Mentor Minister Lee Kuan Yew titled] the second volume of his memoirs From Third World to First: The Singapore Story 1965-2000. And like a corporation, the compensation committee rewards its executives and senior management for a job well done. Au has questions about the wisdom of a steep rise in pay and the feathering of the pension bed. At the time of the last general election, he quantified the growing disparity of the haves and the have-nots of Singapore. Nonetheless, the governing PAP [People's Action Party] strongly believes in the principle of keeping good people in government, thereby offering them competitive salaries comparable to the private sector. It also goes by the rule of thumb that good pay undercuts the recourse to bribery and other forms of malfeasance endemic to Singapore's neighbors. The wisdom of this choice is clearly documented in Singapore's outstanding rankings on the annual corruption index, which makes it an ideal place for multinationals to set up shop. On the other hand, such arguments will hardly win Au over. He sees the [near] doubling of S$1 million salaries for ministers with a jaundiced eye; for him, the riches of Singapore's First World society hardly trickle down to his fellow citizens on whose backs and brawn [was] created the city-state's wealth.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 5, '07)

In her article of April 3 [India unmoved by flying Tigers], with incredible insensitivity, Sudha Ramachandran expostulates against India's refusal to provide more lethal weapons to the Sri Lankan government, which habitually uses these against unarmed Tamil civilians killing and maiming hundreds and displacing thousands from their homes. Since [Mahinda] Rajapakse took the helm as president of Sri Lanka, more than 3,000 Tamils have been killed and more than 200,000 Tamils have been made homeless with lethal weapons already in possession by the Sri Lankan government. Moreover, an unknown number of Tamils have disappeared after arrests and abduction by the government forces. Ms Ramachandran never has the "heart" to write about these or other travails of the Tamils, including the more than 300 Indian Tamil fishermen killed by Sri Lankan forces. The Sri Lankan government also already possesses more than adequate MiG and Kfir bombers, which they use in full measure to devastate Tamil areas, which they are continuing to do to this day. Yet Ms Ramachandran wants to see more Tamil blood flow and India to take "credit" ... Regarding Ms Ramachandran's self-induced nightmares [of] other insurgent groups copying LTTE [the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] in having a token air force, it is instructive to observe that the LTTE only "copied", in a very small way, governments, and therefore, there are plenty of examples for insurgent groups to emulate. The south Indian neo-cons would be serving India better if instead of waging war on the Dravidians, they paid more attention to the fact that the Sri Lankan government is armed, assisted and advised by Pakistan, that the armed forces of which country are flying bombing sorties against the Eelam Tamils and have taken up positions as advisers to the Sri Lankan army at the very northern top of Eelam, which is occupied (Ms Ramachandran got it wrong) by the Sri Lankan Army.
Suthanthiram (Apr 5, '07)

[Re India unmoved by flying Tigers, Apr 3] As the LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] pointed out, their air capability is no threat to anyone else, only to the oppressive Sinhala government, which is on an agenda to drive the whole Tamil community from the island [of Sri Lanka] in three years. Sinhala governments have driven one-third of the Tamil community from Sri Lanka and they are now working to get the rest of the Tamils from the country. LTTE light propeller planes were on a mission to destroy the planes that have been bombing Tamils every day. India should be more concerned about Pakistan's, China's, and the USA's strong presence in Sri Lanka than about two light aircraft ...
Mathan Sutharsan (Apr 5, '07)

Julian Delasantellis takes a crack at oil. His longish article [Crude: Barrels of fun to crack you up, Apr 4] is instructive. It is a quick introduction to oil, petroleum products, energy, and a cry that the Philistines of the oil companies are upon us. Take the United States: it has a dearth of refineries, so no matter how much crude oil it imports, the capacity for crackers to distill it to petroleum products has not caught up with high prices, which scarcity encourages. The explosion of the British Petroleum refinery in Texas is a case in point. The company willfully nickeled and dimed upgrading a refinery to the point only [that] a disaster would ensure. And it did, not only [sending] shock waves through BP's senior management [but depressing] its stock on the market. It is condescending to think that the average motorist does not see behind all the smoke, for where to pin the tail on the donkey of blame. On the other hand, Delasantellis tries to somewhat mitigate the spike of crude prices on world markets, to the seizure of 15 British sailors in the Shatt-al-Arab waterway. The stock exchanges are like thermometers; they take the pulse of the market's heartbeat, and so the Iranians' "shanghaiing" of these sailors put the fear of God in the market, thereby explaining the rise in price. Markets get the jitters over the least scare, and the biggest drop so far has been the collapse of the subprime market in the United States, which is not laid at the feet of the oil-producing countries. Delasantellis could have strengthened his argument about the goosing of oil price had he talked about the feckless behavior of the oil giants during the first oil crisis. They owned the tankers that transported the oil, not the Arabs, not OPEC [Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries]. Had they the courage to stare down the oil producers by saying, "We won't carry your oil," it is possible that these very same producers would have backed down, thereby bringing prices down to older levels. They didn't; they caved in, but hardly suffered in the purse. And what followed is deja vu ... We all know that oil corporate boards know no bounds to greed, but what corrective does Delasantellis foresee? He remains as silent as the Sphinx in the sands of Giza.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 4, '07)

In the article Cherry blossoms, the beautiful and the good [Apr 3] by Spengler, I notice a few conspicuous contradictions. I live and work in Japan (since February 7, 2000) and I must say it never crossed my mind to see the Japanese as being on the same level as the Jewish population. If we see the level of misery, destruction and death Israel (the land of the Jews) rains down upon the Palestinian and Lebanese civilian population, the quote "But it is not the Good; and thinking about Professor [Masahiko] Fujiwara makes me wish that the Japanese were better than they are, for example, in acknowledging various outrages during World War II" borders on being ridiculous. Yes, the Japanese army murdered, maimed and tortured, but given what has happened to Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Afghanistan and Iraq, one might argue this to be a rule rather than an exception. Also the fact that the writer uses the handle "Spengler" instead of his real and/or full name (plus additional credentials) turns this piece into a pro-Israel/pro-Jewish rant or propaganda vehicle. As I enjoy your online articles/editorials, I wonder why you don't allow your readers to know who is behind said article. Any reason you might want to share?
Daniel Dives
Kagoshima, Japan (Apr 4, '07)

None. - ATol

Syed Saleem Shahzad: I am a regular reader of your articles in Asia Times [Online]. My e-mail to you is with reference to your article Another stiff test for Musharraf [Mar 30]. I have spent a considerable amount of time in the US as a student and am keen to let you know that such articles, which draw a parallel between the masses of Pakistan with Afghan Taliban, are utter misconceptions and fallacies on your part. A lot of people abroad read your articles and form images about Pakistan which are based on your faulty conclusions. Look around you, how many young men and women do you see in Pakistan taking up arms? How many want to become notorious for their treatment of women? Do you see women being forced to wear a burqa, women not allowed to work, women not allowed to be educated after the age of eight and until then only permitted to study the Koran? How many women are facing public flogging and execution for violations of laws? None, Mr Shahzad. We are not the Taliban! The people you are reporting on are a minuscule amount of miscreants in our [Pakistani] society. Please don't make them look like the majority; don't make heroes out of them. It harms Pakistan in so many more ways than you can even think. By telling the world media that Pakistani police succumbed under pressure exerted by some neighborhood mullahs, what sort of a country are you trying to portray? This was an isolated incident which should not have taken place. The Lal Mosque leaders had the high moral ground, but no one in a democratic state can take law and order in their personal hands. It was wrong! Maybe you should try to promote the idea of self-restraint and respect for state laws to these so-called beloved Pakistani Taliban of yours. Your article was very objectionable and distasteful for me ...
Danyal Malik (Apr 4, '07)

Pakistan is not huge country like India, so if anything happens, especially in the capital, it becomes big news. Nevertheless, you cannot deny the existence of events in North West Frontier Province, Waziristan and now Islamabad. These are extraordinary events in the 60-year history of Pakistan, and therefore news worth reporting. - Syed Saleem Shahzad

Arif Chaudhry, appearing on behalf of the government in the chief justice reference case [in Pakistan], was manhandled (beaten up) by the lawyers demonstrating for the restoration of the chief justice. Arif Chaudhry was seen badly disheveled and desperately struggling for his life, warding off kicks, slaps and punches, his black coat and necktie removed, his shirt open exposing his bare body and being pulled by the vest by his antagonists. What was most appalling was that all this happened right in front of the apex court of Pakistan and where the legal fraternity was demonstrating for the upholding of the rule of law. Apparently, Arif Chaudhry was maltreated for his assisting the Supreme Judicial Council in finding Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry guilty of the reference made against him, which the demonstrating lawyers - the custodians of the law - considered unethical and unbecoming a member of their fraternity. May I ask the demonstrating lawyers and the attorneys as to what is so unethical about it and what are their standards of morality and ethics? Don't they all defend an offender knowing him fully well to have committed the offense, and yet they exhaust their expertise in finding some legal lacunae in the case, in the proceedings or even in the constitution of the court to get their client (even a murderer) not only freed but boast about it later on among their colleagues and future clients? The day we will have a single lawyer turning down the case of a known criminal, that will be the day to make us proud of our legal fraternity. Until then, the less we speak of them the better for us all.
Colonel Riaz Jafri (Retd)
Rawalpindi, Pakistan (Apr 4, '07)

I want to know how much is the ATimes, and how to pay. [Is it] just one piece of paper or one month? Or one year?
Shijiazhuangfanyizu (Apr 4, '07)

There has not been a print version of Asia Times since 1997, when the newspaper became a casualty of the Asian financial crisis. It is now an Internet-only publication, provided free of charge (for now). - ATol

In measuring the leverage that Iran and the US each have over the other, Dr Trita Parsi gives too much credit to the US's standing [Iran-US: Fighting fire with fire, Apr 3]. Arresting and detaining Iranian officials and diplomats is an act of weakness that puts the US on the same plane as the Iranians of a generation ago. Although Iran still has a long way to go in taking full advantage of its natural resources, it hasn't crippled its fighting forces by throwing them into quicksand and it isn't committed to borrowing trillions of dollars in order to pay for outdated armaments. The US has handed Iraq to Iran on a silver platter and is like that busboy who spilled the soup on the guest of honor but who stills rushes up looking for a tip once the meal's done.
Harald Hardrada
Chapel Hill, North Carolina (Apr 3, '07)

Re Iran-US: Fighting fire with fire (Apr 3): Trita Parsi is right. Unfortunately, in this polarized world, a condition for which the US and the warlike Bush administration have provided the greatest contribution, any kind of resolution during the almost two years of [President George W] Bush is unlikely. After all, the juvenile schoolyard bravado established by BushCo has set the stage for this back-and-forth kidnapping scenario. And decades of refusal to talk to Iran add even more childlike [obstinacy] to our [US] diplomatic posture and the deadly likelihood of escalation. Reason seems to be a sparse quality, considering that America's corporate media seem to only supply BushCo press releases and little objective analysis of the Middle East situation. Yes, I'm afraid that Trita Parsi is right in not supplying much optimism.
Jim of Southern California
USA (Apr 3, '07)

I am not into philosophy but I did find Spengler's Cherry blossoms, the beautiful and the good (Apr 3) quite interesting and cause for thought. The article was short and to the point. It did not get lost in the high clouds of abstract [words] and thought that tend to turn most people off. The thrust of the article was clear, and for that Spengler and ATol deserve kudos for a fine article. Putting the right or wrong of the US involvement in Iraq aside, I am amazed at the claims of the total number of Iraqis killed by US forces. Where and how do these claimants get those humongous numbers? I suspect most of those numbers are Iraqis killed by other Iraqis who are acting out centuries-old tribal and religious hatreds. Who are the culprits here? Put the blame on those doing those killings. Even so, the numbers of deaths given seems outrageously high, and so I again ask: How are those numbers obtained?
Jack Meehan
Moultonborough, New Hampshire (Apr 3, '07)

The Iraqi death toll currently favored by the anti-war camp is about 700,000, probably based largely on a study published late last year by the British medical journal The Lancet. The study purports to tally the number of Iraqis who have died since the invasion of March 2003 as a direct or indirect result of the war and occupation. To download the full Lancet report in pdf format, click here. The document also explains the methodology of the survey. - ATol

Spengler [Cherry blossoms, the beautiful and the good, Apr 3]: I am reminded of an eyewitness account of the execution of an Allied prisoner. The writer noted that the Japanese commander had decided to kill the prisoner himself, with his favorite sword, according the compassionate precepts of bushido. Jump-shifting: you might enjoy The Divine Milieu by [Pierre] Teilhard de Chardin, although I wasn't sure what to make of it when I read it, many years ago.
Steve McCaffery (Apr 3, '07)

Re All fired up over Korea-US free trade [Apr 3]: It is a done deal: the US-Korean Free Trade Agreement, hammered out through long periods of doubt of ever seeing the light of day, it waits now for congressional approval. The FTA is a feather in President Roh Moo-hyun's hat and a plum to the sinking popularity of President George W Bush. As Donald Kirk surmises, the FTA will not stand close scrutiny without a tweaking of the text. Saying this, it will ultimately pass muster, and South Korea will be yet another link in America's pursuit of the gospel of free trade. For Koreans, street theater notwithstanding, rice remains protected, and the citadel of riziculture will withstand the assault of the US's long-grain rice. Yet memories are short: 30 years ago, Koreagate broke out in the American press over rice, Louisiana rice, shipped to Korea, there repackaged and returned to its country of origin. And the name of Tong Shin Park became synonymous with bribery (The very same Mr Park resurfaces during the Jack Abramoff scandal!) For some Americans, importation of Korea's automobiles, 800,000 of which roll on America's highways and byways, stands to tarnish Detroit's image. Eyewash. Hyundai, for example, has assembly plants in the US, and Americans are snapping up its automobiles, as well as Japanese vehicles, because among other things, they are better made and fuel-efficient and price-attractive. Detroit has shot itself in its own foot long ago, having failed to live up to a time when it was the world capital of car making. It had become self-satisfied, drawing interest and profits, and turned a deaf ear to the needs of the buying public. Will Koreans trade in Korean-made cars for American ones? Some may, but many, many others won't, for they are not made to meet Korea's standards. The FTA will bring billions into each country's coffers, and for Americans provide a breach in the dike to break into a seemingly tightly controlled Korean market. Is it a Trojan horse for one side of the Pacific or for the other? Probably not.
Jakob Cambria
USA (Apr 3, '07)

I write re Sudha Ramachandran's article titled India unmoved by LTTE air attack [Apr 3] and her cynical comments about Sri Lankan airspace being so easily violated by the LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam]. Both the writer and Indian authorities must surely know that if a guerrilla group really wants to attack in a manner hitherto not adopted, it will always succeed the first time. Just look at what happened on [September 11, 2001] to the most technologically super-protected nation in the world. India will stand no chance if the LTTE or any other terror group sets its mind to it. India will one day pay for what it did to Sri Lanka by training the Tigers. India owes the whole world recompense for starting an outfit that is now globalized and is on its way to becoming a threat to all humanity.
Dr M Ladduwahetty (Apr 3, '07)

I just wanted to make a complaint about the way the article of A Falklands War in the Gulf [Apr 3] is written on the main page of Asia Times Online. Oddly enough when you click on the article, the article is titled A Falklands War in the Persian Gulf. Unfortunately with the current propaganda campaign against Iran, Iranian historical heritage is targeted too, and I believe altering history at the cost of political interests is a betrayal to humanity and shameful act; so I would like to ask you to take action immediately and demand a change of name on their main page adding the word "Persian" to the title. I thank you in advance.
Sascha Gorgin (Apr 3, '07)

The headline was shortened on the Front Page as otherwise it would not fit in the space provided. If such trivia could alter history, ATol would by now have used its power to end all war, poverty, disease and global warming. - ATol

Re US shadow over China-Russia ties by M K Bhadrakumar (Mar 31), I believe (contrary to Oleg Beliakovich's letter of April 2) the author successfully chronicles "the current dynamics of the US-China-Russia triangle". The crux is that in this triangle all sides need to accept reality and to have plans for contingencies, which should not be mistaken as objectives. The diplomatic reality of an East Asia at peace with auspicious possibilities (and the end of the Cold War) serves as an effective constraint on US diplomatic response. At the same time, the reality of economic integration compels moderation on all sides. I believe that US response to trade friction with the PRC [People's Republic of China] is the only leeway left to influence China's rise. Even this leeway should be viewed from the perspective of the PRC having joined the WTO [World Trade Organization] with economic success. The PRC does not need to expand to achieve all its objectives: energy security, access to markets, and the recovery of Taiwan; any US objective to contain China has to be viewed from this perspective. It is entirely within diplomatic acceptability, and even with obvious concession of global leadership to the USA, for the PRC to spend about 3% of its GNP [gross national product] on defense, and in so doing to be a major power in two to three decades. While many inside and outside the US government will continue to voice their concern, it is difficult to articulate any objection to China's military spending in diplomatic parlance. Meanwhile, the fiasco in the Middle East will continue to drain the USA financially and spiritually, perhaps for decades, irrespective of the various modes of failure in Iraq. The USA will be loath to turn East Asia into another Middle East by starting an elective war so that Taiwan will not be a modified Hong Kong. Moreover, economic sanction on the PRC, in response to pressure on Taiwan ideologically deemed unacceptable, will not be considered when Chinese global economic presence has become sufficiently pervasive. Hong Kong will be the quiet beacon of peace that the West will more and more have to notice, and that Taiwan, as it senses reality, will have to observe. Global consumer resentment to overt pressure on Taiwan will be the last important factor in favor of Taiwan; however, as China diversifies its export markets (and increases domestic consumption), fractional losses in trade with the most ideologically charged countries, such as the USA, will be less critical. Consumers in countries whose ethos centers on traditional culture would not object as much to mainland China's design on reunification with Taiwan, especially peaceful, I believe.
Jeff Church
USA (Apr 3, '07)

Re US silent on detained Iranians [Mar 31] by Khody Akhavi: The Iranians should make return of the 15 members of the British reconnoitering force contingent on return of its liaison personnel kidnapped by US forces in Iraq. What could be more reasonable? And, by the way, anyone who thinks that the American and British publics have had enough of blatant militarism and imperial adventurism by their respective governments should spend a few minutes reading the posts at the BBC's Have Your Say. Supporters of Anglo-American military empire are clearly being forced to eat shit by Iran. Unfortunately, they have not eaten nearly enough yet - that, however, is very likely to change.
Jose R Pardinas, PhD
San Diego, California (Apr 2, '07)

It is an unjustified act to capture British sailors! Now imagine UK [and] US acts. Illegal, unjustified war on Iraq [based] on the lies [about weapons of mass destruction]. Capture, occupation, ruthless shock-and-awe operations, sectarian divide engineered by [US President George W] Bush [and British Prime Minister Tony] Blair killing 700,000 civilians. The problem lies in illegal occupation, illegally installed pro-Iran Shi'a regime through clandestine methods of Iran covertly first supporting Bush-Blair to remove Saddam [Hussein]. The USA, the UK, Iran, and Iraqi Shi'as should be punished, condemned (by Allah) in person and as nation. They will now suffer for time immemorial.
Miss Zeenat-e-Jehan
Pakistan (Apr 2, '07)

Re US shadow over US-China ties [Mar 31] by M K Bhadrakumar: If the author had tasked himself with chronicling the current dynamics of the US-China-Russia triangle, he almost succeeded. It's an accurate account. But since nothing in geopolitics is quite as it seems, the article is somewhat lacking. First of all, it ought to be taken for granted that beneath [its] relatively calm demeanor, the United States is unsettled by the relentless pace of China and is watching its only potential peer rival with rising dread. Occasional Pentagon fireworks about the Chinese military buildup and bubbling trade tensions are obvious give-aways of increasing American anxiety. The only logical explanation for Chinese-American detente at this particular time could be found in the fact that the United States finds itself tied up in the Middle East and is trying to secure its rear, as well as growing realization in Washington that China's economic might makes it impervious to crude pressure. Since Russia is a smaller opponent than China, the US believes it can walk and chew gum at the same time, although even that is getting harder and harder by the minute, given the questionable state of the US economy and its political morass. At this point American weakness must suit China just fine. Economic development remains Beijing's overriding concern, and since China's economic model is only sustainable if coupled with unfettered access to Western markets, China is not eager for any conflagration with Washington unless pushed by US policies. However, at some point China will feel compelled to assert itself, and all the contradictions embedded in this relationship will have to be resolved one way or the other. That's why China is acutely aware of the need to keep Russia as an ally. With Moscow on its side, China can't be defeated militarily, whereas if Russia sides with its opponents or demurs, China's defeat is quite conceivable. People should remember that Hu Jintao's first foreign visit as Chinese president was to Moscow. As for Russia, it's in the midst of its own "economic miracle". In nominal dollars it is growing faster than much-ballyhooed China and India. Its rising economic clout already makes the American advance into Russia's periphery extremely difficult, if not impossible. Ukraine's rejection of the US-sponsored Orange Revolution is an illustration of that, and has all the ingredients for massive geopolitical humiliation of the West. Unlike China, Russia can challenge the US without much fear, since apart from holding billions of [dollars in] US securities, it's almost completely detached from America. In a world where being a US ally is fast becoming a liability, that's not an altogether losing proposition. All in all, the triangle appears to work like this. China needs the US economically and Russia politically and militarily. Russia needs China to leverage its own global standing and multiply its options. Washington sees a threat in both, and would love to use one against the other on an ad hoc basis, although its present course only makes China and Russia stronger. How it all plays out, I guess only time will tell. One thing is clear - the American "shadow", as much else, is not what it once was.
Oleg Beliakovich
Seattle, Washington (Apr 2, '07)

I was amazed at the level of detail in the article China draws Africa into its orbit published on March 31 in the business section of ATol. It shows once again the bravery of ATol to commission features others will rather see published in scholarly journals. The authors obviously know their stuff, so I can't be more surprised at the conclusions they reached. How can anybody, after all that research, actually claim that China's space program is on the ascendancy? It is suffering from chronic and severe brain drain, with shoddy products and a complete lack of focus. For the money China spends I guess even Fiji would do better at space commercialization in the years to come. The authors should be advising African countries to steer clear of China and to spend their money where they will get the best value. Their conclusions are a very disappointing outcome in an otherwise very in-depth and brilliantly written article.
Dennis
Palo Alto, Santa Clara, California (Apr 2, '07)

Re China and the 'enlightened' West [Mar 31]: Re [Will] Hutton's The Writing on the Wall, maybe it's time for some Chinese person to write how the USA needs to adopt Confucian values, like getting along with one's neighbors.
Lester Ness
Kunming, China (Apr 2, '07)

In China and the 'enlightened' West by Tony Norfield (Mar 31), a critique to the work of Will Hutton, Norfield seems to have chronologically truncated Western enlightenment (lower-case). I refer to Western cognizance of the ills of racism and related social progress after World War II, in the USA indicated by the Civil Rights Movement and in Europe exemplified by the global decolonization initiative. While Norfield mentions racism and colonialism as paradoxical accompaniments to Western Enlightenment of the 18th century (and Hutton's oblivion to them), Norfield does not discuss the role of more recent Western enlightenment against racism. One really needs to consider the profundity and virulence of racism in the USA a half-century earlier to appreciate the tremendous social progress that has taken place. I suggest that the decline of racism in the USA is very much reflected by the more racially enlightened mindset of the foreign-policy elite. Specifically, this is important in the Taiwan issue. As I have stated, due to Taiwan's geography and associated abject energy vulnerability, the mainland side would not need to start the major military offensive. The continuation of the current trend means likely reunification as Taiwan would not withstand the pressure on its energy vulnerability in the decades to come. Without the visceral reaction to a mainland attack on Taiwan, the USA will be ever more unlikely to start a war with wanton disregard to destruction in Taiwan and the Chinese mainland driven by ideological caprice. I think that those in the Chinese mainland who do not (or refuse to) appreciate recent social progress in the USA are problematically underestimating mainland China's decisive advantage over Taiwan. Last, re Washington enters 'comfort women' debate by Eli Clifton (Mar 30), one should remember that the Chinese- and Japanese-Americans used to be the "Orientals".
Jeff Church
USA (Apr 2, '07)

I would like to echo the words of the ethnic Indian in the article Malaysia's melting pot on the boil (Mar 24). If I am a citizen of the country, can speak the language, educated in this country, why should I be discriminated against, [Jeff] Church [letter, Mar 27]? What business is it of yours what I do in my own home? If I choose to speak a different language at home, listen to different music or eat different foods, isn't that my business? Once the music or food becomes popular in this country, then it's okay? Most countries, including India and the US, make laws that benefit the minority, and that's why the laws of Malaysia are so wrong. The readers of ATol might find this interesting, but I live in Chicago and I see this every day. I work downtown and I take the train, which goes north and south. The southbound trains are full of blacks and the [northbound] whites. This is not confined to Chicago but is common to every major [US] city. Blacks have been ghettoed in the country; they try to move to new places and whites immediately find new places to live. A young black teenager was recently sentenced to six years in prison for pushing a hall monitor at her school, while a white teenager who burned down a home received a stern warning! So much for assimilation! Blacks have wised up. They now call themselves African-Americans. A look at photos of blacks in the '40s and now gives one a start. Blacks now wear different clothes (their suits are pink!), wear earrings [and] dreadlocks, even their names are totally different. But since they are considered Americans, they are simply "being themselves". Newer ones are not so lucky. There was a huge ruckus over a Muslim senator who wanted to take his oath of office using a Koran instead of a Bible! Think of that! Does that make any sense, to harass a Muslim to take the oath using a book he does not consider holy? In India, we have a Muslim president, [and] the prime minister is a Sikh. The chief of the armed forces is also a Sikh. One of the most respected industrial icons is a Parsi. To top it off, we gave the keys to the country to a Christian woman who was born in a foreign country! India has always welcomed total strangers but, unlike the US, never imposed any conditions. Mother India gave a home to Jews, Chinese, Bhutanese, Bohras, Parsis and countless others, but never asked them to give up their culture. Finally, I find it interesting that the Church constantly refers to diversity in a positive way. That's a bit strange, you can't have it both ways.
Jayant Patel
Chicago, Illinois (Apr 2, '07)

March 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