Wary of Weapons and of War

Before the world celebrates the promised return of U.N. weapons inspectors to Iraq, it is worth remembering the history (“Heading to Battle,” Iraq, Sept. 30). Iraq thwarted and outwitted U.N. inspectors for seven years before making their work so impossible that they left. Deceit and propaganda are the most practiced arts of a dictatorship. The Iraqi regime is good at both. If Saddam Hussein lets the inspectors back in and stays in power, the West will be engaged in a dangerous self-deception if it thinks he isn’t cheating. Regime change is the only measure that will handle Saddam and teach other dictators a lesson that matters. Tom Minchin Melbourne, Australia

September 11 was without a doubt the worst the world has seen in a long time. But President Bush shouldn’t make the same mistakes as his enemies. He doesn’t want to go down as the man in history responsible for the loss of lives and the start of World War III. Teddy Roosevelt wrote, “Aggressive fighting for the right is the noblest sport the world affords.” He did not say, “Since you can’t find Osama bin Laden, go out and start a nuclear war.” With Bush’s thinking, we could see the first war of the 21st century. It is OK for him and those around him, as they will be rushed to a safe house or bunker, and we will be left to sort it all out. Allan Limmer via internet

Since Saddam seized power without any democratic mandate, his nation has suffered economic decline and become contemptible in the eyes of the world due to his bellicosity and unilateralist disdain for the environment and the United Nations. At the same time, his weapons of mass destruction strike fear in our hearts. And he and his cronies have grown rich by corrupt dealings in oil and other industries. Why does Bush hate him so? They have so much in common. David Irby Dingle, Ireland

Zapping Zakaria’s Zeal

As an Englishman living in France for many years, I take offense at the negative connotation of France in “The Lonesome Doves of Europe” (World View, Sept. 30). The underlying message is “You are either with us or against us,” us being the United States. France being one of the countries on the U.N. Security Council that have not “fallen in line” behind America, Fareed Zakaria has taken the opportunity to vent his biased opinion of France. Is it not possible for a country to air views that are different from the United States’ without having scorn poured all over it? France may have some ulterior motive for not waging immediate war on Iraq, but from what I’ve read lately the United States seems particularly interested in taking control of Iraqi oilfields. And believe it or not, France does show genuine concern for the hardships inflicted on the Iraqi population through U.N. sanctions. Is this “naked self-interest”? Let’s be honest. If the decision to wage war on Iraq doesn’t go through the United Nations this time, we may as well dismantle it, as it serves no purpose other than as a debating society. Ultimately this may serve the United States, which seems to find the process of consulting other countries too long and frustrating. However, America must realize that a consensus is needed for decisions having potential worldwide consequences–this is why we need the United Nations. Peter Dawe St-Thibault-des-Vignes, France

I have been a NEWSWEEK subscriber for almost 10 years, and there have always been articles or views I didn’t especially like, but “The Lonesome Doves of Europe” is so narrow-minded, biased and focused on the American point of view that I could not decide whether to laugh, cry or feel pity for a world dominated by views like this. The author is right when he writes that America will do just fine in a world in which nations act purely on the basis of interest and power. Did the United States ever act on any other basis? Thomas Stegh Cologne, Germany

During the past weeks, Fareed Zakaria gave us very convincing articles about what should be done in Iraq. Then he wrote “The Lonesome Doves of Europe,” in which he rudely demonstrated his disdain toward the international community, strengthening the impression that the same feeling is shared across the United States. His statement about the reasons why France and Russia are members of the U.N. Security Council is an insulting line drawn through centuries of history. His comments about France’s World War II victory are disgusting, both in the content and the way it is done: anyone could easily write a parenthetical personal dig about U.S. past and current misbehaviors. The United States still benefits from sympathy all around the world, but rather than leveraging it to cement a positive public opinion, in my opinion, this column only spreads division. David Dossot Thionville, France

What does Fareed Zakaria believe? Some weeks he seems to believe that the United States should attack Iraq after listening to allies and going through international forums like the United Nations. But other weeks, when American allies don’t share all of America’s views on the subject, he paints them as a bunch of countries that “pursue naked self-interest.” Viewed from Europe those words seem to apply to American motives in their bid to make war with Iraq. An atomic bomb in three years? What about those countries that already have it, like Pakistan, India and especially North Korea? Is Kim Jong Il more trustworthy than Saddam Hussein? We Europeans are ready to truly support America if Bush showed us that he isn’t just after his own interests. M. Araujo dos Anjos Lisbon, Portugal

There is an Asian adage which says, “Be careful when pointing an accusing finger because the other fingers point back at you.” Mr. Zakaria accuses the other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council of having “turned the United Nations into a stage from which to pursue naked self-interest,” of having “used multilateralism as a way to further unilateral policies” and of “making concessions to aggressive dictators.” Is America innocent of the same? Vic Javier Antipolo City, Philippines

Worth a Thousand Words?

The photo of the Palestinian Authority headquarters under siege shows a bird flying toward the clouds of dust (“Arafat’s Alamo,” Periscope, Sept. 30). Could this be a “dove of peace” bringing a plea for reconciliation from a higher authority in the heavens? Burt Silverstein Le Cannet, France

The German Economy

Congratulations on your insightful article about Germany’s unwillingness to change (“The German Problem,” Europe, Sept. 30). NEWSWEEK presented all the deep-rooted problems no one in Germany dares to speak about in order to avoid an angry uprising by all the various lobbyists who might lose parts of their benefits. It was Chancellor Gerhard Schroder who suggested (following a lead by Josef Straub decades ago) that improvements in Germany are possible only if the situation for everyone gets disastrous–and despite 4 million unemployed workers, a breathtaking bureaucracy and theftlike taxes and Social Security payments, this state seems not to have been reached yet. Probably it will take some more years to make Germans wake up; let’s hope that is before the disaster has become unavoidable. Alexander Rudyk Wiesbaden, Germany

I wonder if the authors of this article have ever been to Germany. They present a strange mix of personal judgment and wrong comparisons to other European countries. Whether a society prefers consensus or a U.S.-style free market should be a democratic decision of the people. Many people in Europe feel that it is better to offer welfare to the poor than to build fences around villas of (sometimes greedy) executives while many poor live in lawless neighborhoods without medical care. No doubt there is room for improvement in German society, but Germany is still one of the most powerful economies in the world, as evidenced by NEWSWEEK’s “Honda’s Midlife Makeover” story (Business, Sept. 9). Remember that the situation in the other big countries of Europe is by no means better in terms of GNP, deficit and unemployment, despite the fact that they do not suffer the consequences of reunification. As a matter of fact, the former West German part is still outperforming many European neighbors. As a German living in Switzerland, I can assure you that many of the points criticized have their counterparts in Switzerland, and nevertheless the Swiss economy is one of the best in Europe, with less than 3 percent unemployment and a more than 20 percent foreign work force. The question is not between “free market” and “consensus.” The key to success is efficient and lean administration, as well as incorruptible and honest civil servants, industry leaders and taxpayers. Frank Scheffold Fribourg, Switzerland

NEWSWEEK’s analysis of the German malaise is perfectly correct. The origins of social and educational decline go back to the era of Willy Brandt when the present German foreign minister, now Germany’s most popular politician, threw stones at the police, smashed a policeman and trampled him without ever being sued due to political protection. The most outrageous infamy, however, is the recent evocation of anti-Americanism by Chancellor Schroder that, together with the August flood, made him win the election. For that, all decent Germans (and this is still the majority) must apologize to the American people to whom we owe liberation from tyranny in 1945, the political and economic “miracle” and, for 40 years, protection from another tyranny. Peter Herde Alzenau, Germany

Elections in Kashmir

Your article “The Fear Factor” (Asia, Sept. 30) makes some claims about the Indian Army that are not based on fact. The role of the Army in the elections in Jammu and Kashmir was to provide a safe environment for conducting free and fair elections, not to coerce people into voting. Both the Election Commission of India and diplomats from various countries who were in the region during the elections have stated so. The operations undertaken by the Indian Army to protect and honor the life of the citizens in that region have been extremely humane and people-friendly. It is a tribute to the Indian Army’s skills that it has desisted from using heavy weapons and explosives and has instead fought with light weapons–increasing the soldiers’ personal risk at the aim of reducing collateral damage. Col. Shruti Kant, Spokesman Indian Army New Delhi, India

Editor’s Note: NEWSWEEK stands by its story.

Museums’ Taken Treasures I was pleased to read your sidebar about Egypt’s stolen fortunes (“Curse of the Mummies,” World Affairs, Sept. 2). At last, this long-debated issue is being addressed. Zahi Hawass’s efforts to protect our heritage should be the concern of all lovers of Egyptology. Western museums need to send home all those stolen pieces. How can the British Museum exhibit the Rosetta Stone so proudly? Were the Pyramids built in London? Mohamed Abu Rida Cairo, Egypt