Your cover package on global education (Aug. 20/Aug. 27) pointed out critical issues in America’s school system. Maintaining U.S. scientific and technological leadership is essential to the future of our country and work force; however, the United States is not keeping pace with foreign competition. Fewer American students are pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and they are performing at levels far below students in competitor nations on international standardized tests in these subjects. Meanwhile, international students educated in America are facing misguided immigration policies that hamper their ability to apply their skills and knowledge in the United States. That is why businesses and technology associations are working to double the number of science, technology, engineering and math graduates with bachelor’s degrees by 2015. Investing in basic research and increasing funding for math and science education can help reverse current trends. John J. Castellani President, Business Roundtable Washington, D.C.
I always thought the “Mandarin will replace English tomorrow” theory was farfetched (“English for Everyone”). I cannot imagine a world so dominated by the Latin alphabet to readily switch from familiar English letters to difficult Chinese characters. Over the past century, the United States has given English prominence, and during these past few decades Europe has consolidated it. As a Latin American I can say that English is considered no less important here than it is in Europe. It is not surprising that many parents here value their children’s grades in English as much as their grades in math or Spanish. Even if Mandarin does replace English in 50 years, there are certain fields—such as science, tourism, entertainment and diplomacy—that English has dominated for so long, it is impossible to imagine them in any other language. I reassure my mother that English won’t fade away. After all, arguably it is the closest the world has come to a genuine universal language. Andres Prieto Mexico City, Mexico
I was amused that William Underhill thought to compare the cost of an engineering degree from Harvard to one from the University of Malaya (“It’s Not Easy Being English”). Has he actually tried hiring—or interviewing—graduates from the University of Malaya? In most cases, the additional $28,000 per year (the cost of Harvard over the University of Malaya) is money well spent. Chen Seong Joon Geneva, Switzerland
Renewing the Cold War?
Owen Matthews is absolutely right in his analysis of the conceptual and ideological rebirth of the U.S.S.R. under Russian President Vladimir Putin (“Back to the U.S.S.R.,” Aug. 20/Aug. 27). Not only was it naive on the part of the West to assume that Russia would embrace a free democratic system after the self-inflicted implosion of the U.S.S.R. in 1991 but the West did everything to schmooze Russia politically, diplomatically and economically as if it felt guilty for the Soviet Union’s demise. The fact of the matter is that Russia’s past is alive and kicking, and President Putin is determined to restore his country’s status as a true superpower. Karl H. Pagac Villeneuve-Loubet, France
Russia’s inevitable re-emergence AS a geopolitical power has unsettled the West because we wanted a client state led by a Boris Yeltsin-like political class. Western leaders branded Russian behavior as unacceptable when Moscow interrupted natural-gas supplies to Ukraine. The only acceptable behavior, apparently, was that the Russian taxpayer should have continued to subsidize Ukraine’s natural-gas consumers. Another instance of so-called unacceptable behavior is Russia’s attempt to wrest Slav-populated Trans-Dniestra from Romanian-speaking Moldova. Stalin’s gift of Trans-Dniestra to Moldova was arbitrary and cynical, but it was deemed immutable by the West. So an acceptable Russia is one that dares not pursue its national interest. Yugo Kovach Twickenham, England
The Aftermath of a Genocide
Rwanda’s terrible genocide affected all its people—but especially the women who were raped or contracted HIV. Many children were born as a result of these rapes, and people are still traumatized by them. It’s laudable that Jonathan Torgovnik traveled to Rwanda to obtain the stories of those numerous victims (“Children of War,” Aug. 20/Aug. 27). Genocide is a problem that concerns all of us because it can happen anywhere—it is important to learn about people who unfortunately experienced this. Daniela Calva Ruiz De Chavez Mexico City, Mexico
Thoughts on Tamil Terror
Your survey of terrorism in Asia and the use of increasingly sophisticated IED technology by terrorists provides extensive and interesting insights (“How to Beat Terror,” Aug. 20/Aug. 27). But I was surprised that you made no reference to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) of Sri Lanka, a brutal group banned as a terrorist organization in most democratic countries of the world. For the past 24 years, the LTTE has been refining its IED technology, which it has deployed with devastating effect—killing hundreds and destroying places of worship and economic assets. The most recent IED attack resulted in the deaths of more than 70 civilians in a bus loaded with schoolchildren and expectant mothers who were going to their clinics. The LTTE’s suicide-bomb technology has also reached an alarming level of effectiveness. Despite the threats posed by this group, Sri Lankan security forces have progressively curtailed its effectiveness (without spending billions of dollars) through a combination of intensive training, carefully organized foot patrols and coordinated search operations. The extensive program to win the hearts and minds of the Tamil minority has led to most of the detections of IEDs in Sri Lanka. They result from information provided by Tamil civilians. Perhaps the techniques used by Sri Lankan security forces could set a standard for other security establishments as they deal with their own terrorist problems. Ravinatha Aryasinha Spokesperson, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Colombo, Sri Lanka
What Price Water?
In the article “Very Liquid Assets” (Aug. 20/Aug. 27) you explain how water is becoming a threatened resource and state that multimillion-dollar companies are investing in water because pollution is causing a decrease of water reserves. Governments are supporting this because they don’t have the money to purify all the water needed for cities, especially in Asia. This is a huge problem because these governments and companies seem more eager to take advantage of the decrease in clean water than concerned about finding a solution to the contamination of rivers and ponds. If this problem is not solved soon, the price of water will be too high for poor people. It could then become an even bigger crisis. Ismael Gomez Gonzalez Mexico City, Mexico
Displacements of the NT2 Dam
If the Lao farmers and fishermen displaced by the Nam Theun 2 dam could eat their new houses, Jonathan Kent’s article (“A Kinder, Gentler Dam,” Aug. 20/Aug. 27) might be easier to stomach. He asserts that Nam Theun 2 is different from the dam disasters of the past, thanks to the World Bank’s social and environmental policies. But standards are valuable only if they are followed. In reality, the World Bank and project developers have failed to meet commitments intended to help villagers weather the trauma of resettlement. Many resettlers are spending their second rainy season in dilapidated temporary houses. They will no longer have sufficient land for growing rice or for their buffalo, and there aren’t nearby markets for their new cash crops. Kent also fails to mention that more than 120,000 people downstream will lose land, resources and income sources as a result of Nam Theun 2. Plans to compensate these villagers are still murky. It is doubtful whether benefits from the dam will ever trickle down, but the costs to local livelihoods are real. Shannon Lawrence LAO Program Director International Rivers Network Berkeley, California
The Lessons of Vietnam
Fareed Zakaria rightly concludes that America should move away from its foreign policy of fear and go back to its policy of openness and inclusion and focus on trade, engagement and cooperation (“Beyond Bush,” June 11). In Iraq, America made the mistake of trying to export its brand of government. America might have done well to play its money, trade and weapons-exporting game. But George W. Bush pushed the envelope and started the game of regime change by taking unilateral military action against Saddam Hussein. He forgot Vietnam’s lessons and laid another country waste, thanks to the invasion and the botched attempt to govern and bring democracy to a people who are more concerned with staying alive. The Democrats and Republican moderates had better see through this sham war and take steps to bring it to an end. There’s no victory to be gained, only more deaths and destruction. Americans should realize that the “inalienable right” to happiness applies to everyone on earth—it is not the right of U.S. citizens alone. S. Mohanakrishnan Auckland, New Zealand
The only solution for getting out of the no-win war in Iraq and perhaps break the cycle of violence is to partition the country. Since a national unity government has been impossible to form, the three groups might be willing to separate themselves from their centuries-old enemies; the oil-revenue problem can be settled diplomatically. It’s a shame to pour $9 billion a month down a bottomless hole for this artificial war. How many more Americans have to die before political maturity comes to Washington’s powers that be? James Mc Donald Milan, Italy
Democracy and the Middle East
Your June 25 cover story, “The Gaza Effect,” was an eye-opener about a fundamental problem in the Middle East. Since President Bush was elected in 2000, he has tried to foster democracy in the Middle East. However, instituting a new political culture in a society that has for years been accustomed to a different way of governing is difficult and needs to be done in stages. For instance, the Bush administration refused to recognize Hamas’s growing power among Palestinians and insisted—despite repeated warnings—that Hamas take part in elections in 2005, in the name of democracy. Then, after Hamas was elected, the Bush administration decided to ignore the Palestinians’ democratic decision and internationally isolated the Hamas administration. Now, how can the leader of any Middle Eastern country publicly promote democracy when the Bush administration refuses to recognize a democratic decision by the Palestinians? Bush’s attempt to instill democracy resulted in a defeat, not a victory. The plan to introduce democracy in the Middle East backfired. The fact is that in the Middle East, democratic elections often show support for very undemocratic groups because these groups are an authentic reflection of local sentiments and political culture. The U.S. government needs to take the time to properly understand the unique nature of the Middle East and gradually promote democracy using the right tools. This approach would be more conducive to allowing citizens to have a chance to learn, understand and make use of the rights that underlie a real, lasting, Western-style democracy. Netanel Lapidot Elkana, Israel
Al Qaeda is alive and well in North Africa, getting a steady supply of recruits from the bidonvilles that surround cities like Casablanca or Algiers where poverty, squalor, unemployment and despair breeds terrorists. The same conditions also exist in the Gaza Strip. William Miller Via Internet
Surely I am not the only one who noticed, in separate articles, the sentences “The president’s effort has so far had the opposite effect of what Bush intended,” pertaining to $75 million worth of democracy funding in Iran, and “Things haven’t worked out the way Bush expected,” in reference to the Hamas electoral victory in Gaza? Isn’t it time to stop feigning surprise when circumstances sour on issues Bush has had hope for or a hand in? Knowing what is at stake, it is imperative that Americans look around their communities and elect the next great president. Rob Fraser Milan, Italy
Jolie, the Good Samaritan
In a harsh world where the gap between the haves and the have-nots is widening alarmingly, it’s people like Angelina Jolie who stand out to make a difference by offering succor to the underprivileged and the downtrodden (“Angelina Wants to Save the World,” June 25). It’s one thing to donate millions for a cause but entirely another to get involved in the cause itself. It’s rare to see celebrities doing what Jolie does so dedicatedly. May her tribe increase. K. Chidanand Kumar Bangalore, India
Angelina Jolie says that “Real work and your integrity will win out.” An individual, even a celebrity, should ignore malicious, abusive remarks. She has done that. Doing good is admirable. Period. As Teddy Roosevelt might say, “Bully!” Michael G. Driver Ichihara City, Japan
Angelina Jolie deserves praise for portraying Mariane Pearl, wife of slain journalist Daniel Pearl, and thereby contributing to the cause of greater international understanding. I agree with Brad Pitt that only someone with Jolie’s resolve and reputation could fit the role of Mariane, who, despite her grief for the brutal murder of her husband, did not publicly blame any Muslim or seek revenge for his death. Jolie’s transformation is a symbol of the immense influence Hollywood celebrities are exerting not just on American politics but on the post-9/11 international environment as well, especially in issues concerning the Darfur tragedy and the war in Iraq. I wish that Filipino celebrities would strive to emulate the example of Hollywood stars as advocates of change and development. The current trend for showbiz personalities in my country is either to directly run for public office or mire themselves in personal controversies that are overly celebrated by our entertainment media. Aldan S. Avila Rizal, Philippines
Your cover story on Angelina Jolie was excellent. Like the poverty issue she has taken up, I too have taken up a mission to heal the wounds of soldiers disabled by mine blasts, gunshots and grenade attacks and also help ex-servicemen and the families of martyrs. Some soldiers lose their limbs because of frostbite. I have succeeded in getting soldiers into wheelchairs or on crutches and back to productivity. Mukesh Anand Project Healing Touch Mission Gurgaon, India
A Partisan Word Choice
Apropos the headline on your June 18 piece “Our Latest Man in Baghdad”: the use of the word “our” instead of “America’s” seems to compromise your journalistic integrity by associating NEWSWEEK with a particular side in the Iraq conflict. Your editors should make a more concerted effort to seek out and eliminate biases in reporting. Zachary Pegan Santa Clara, California
Fired by the Congress
In “The New War On Hillary” (June 18), you say that Republican activist David Bossie is producing “a tough documentary” about the Clintons aimed at “a new generation of voters who don’t remember the old Clinton wars.” You noted that Bossie “worked tirelessly” as an investigator for the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight in the 1990s but failed to mention that Bossie’s alleged actions in that post ultimately got him fired from the committee and earned him the condemnation of congressional Republicans and Democrats. Les Nelayan Via Internet
