Letters

“When Outlaws Get the Bomb” [Oct. 23], on the aftermath of North Korea’s nuclear-weapons test, overlooked the significance of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), the only binding, multilateral commitment to the goal of disarmament by nuclear-weapons states. Signatories are obligated to negotiate and achieve the elimination of nuclear arms. To have any hope of stopping proliferation and creating security, the world’s powers have to work toward disarmament.
Fredrik S. Heffermehl
Oslo

Like all nuclear-weapons programs, North Korea’s should be a concern for everyone. The notion of who is an outlaw and who occupies the moral high ground on enforcing nuclear nonproliferation isn’t as clear to me as your article makes out. I suspect that the U.S.’s current work on tactical nuclear weapons and our unwillingness to reduce our inventory of warheads are in violation of the NPT—making the U.S. an outlaw. If we’re including violent tendencies in an analysis of risk, the U.S. is the only nuclear power to have used those weapons on human beings. I would say our role in leading nonproliferation enforcement efforts is somewhat hypocritical. We need to set a better example.
Timothy C. Hohn
Lake Forest Park, Washington, U.S.

In the run-up to the Iraq war, I recall National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice stating that, in lieu of solid proof that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, “we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.” I also recall getting into heated debates and insisting that North Korea was the actual case of a dictator working toward acquiring WMD. While the Bush Administration pursued a war in Iraq, the smoking gun turned into a mushroom cloud in Pyongyang. The Bush Administration has failed miserably in addressing the North Korean threat, and its policies (or lack thereof) have made us all less safe.
Nana Kwamie
Toronto

North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il has clearly shown with the recent nuclear test that bilateral negotiations are meaningless to him. He has made laughingstocks of Presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, whose Administrations engaged in direct talks with North Korea about nuclear proliferation. Kim has also made fools of South Korean Presidents Kim Dae Jung and Roh Moo Hyun. Who else in the world is going to dream of engaging in bilateral talks with Kim Jong Il again, unless in delusion?
Ke Park
Anaheim, California, U.S.

Negotiation is by far the best way to defuse North Korea’s nuclear crisis. But if severe international sanctions are necessary, we shouldn’t expect cooperation from China because its national security would be threatened by a sudden collapse of North Korea. There would be a huge influx of Korean refugees, and the power vacuum might be filled with military forces headed by the U.S. While the world condemns Pyongyang for its irresponsible nuclear test, we should perhaps also ponder its real fear of extermination by a superpower and its need for self-protection. Why does Washington still obstinately and arrogantly refuse to sit down with Pyongyang for direct bilateral talks, respect its sovereignty and give it the chance to open up and reform?
Stephen Kwok Wai Chan
Hong Kong

Rocket to the White House?
Americans are so desperate for a hero and someone we can trust, we are looking to create a President out of a first-term Senator [Oct. 23]. Wherever he goes, Barack Obama is asked the same question: “Will you run?” Let this man get his political legs under him and step forward when he is ready.
Peter K. Ehrle
Oak Park, Illinois, U.S.

As impressed as I am by Obama, I fear he would be this generation’s Jimmy Carter, a man whose humility we appreciate and whose inexperience we’re willing to overlook simply because we desire a change from the lies and arrogance of his immediate predecessors. The presidency is no place for on-the-job training.
Howard Baldwin
Sunnyvale, California, U.S.

To explain the mania surrounding Obama’s political career, Joe Klein quoted Shelby Steele, who said that “it’s all about gratitude” and that white Americans are enthusiastic about the Senator because he allows them to forget about “racial guilt.” As an Asian American who strongly supports Obama, where do I fall? Once again, a conversation on race has been reduced to white and black. I am energized by the Senator because he is smart, thoughtful and pragmatic. He represents me, a Democrat with strong Christian values. He knows the struggle of trying to attain the American Dream and the difficulties of being an ethnic minority in America. It’s as simple as that.
Chong-Hwa Lee
Derwood, Maryland, U.S.

I am a Christian and conservative Republican, but I can’t help hoping that Obama will become our next President. I believe he is wrong about abortion, but he has acknowledged in a refreshingly Socratic way that he can’t just dismiss the views of those on the other side. That may be politicking to earn my vote, but if a pro-life Republican ultimately sends us into a third world war with status quo Republican rhetoric, a pro-life position is kind of pointless.
Eric Murr
Greencastle, Pennsylvania, U.S.

The story on Obama reminded me of something Bono, one of your previous Persons of the Year, has said repeatedly: “America is more than just a country; it’s an idea.” The Senator gives me a similar feeling. True, he hasn’t done very much yet, and he may not be the boldest voice we are longing for. But the very idea of how he embodies America is what excites us Democrats. We are waiting to see where he takes us, and we are ready for the ride.
Simeon Humphreys
Chicago

Obama may not be our savior, but he has the charisma and capability to be our Moses and lead us out of the wilderness.
Bill Longtine
Evansville, Indiana, U.S.

Hell will freeze over and the devil will be on ice skates before the South will ever support a mixed-race liberal Democrat for President. There are still a lot of people down here who believe that miscegenation (which, like abortion, used to be a crime) remains immoral and sinful. Add to that Obama’s al-Qaeda-sounding name, and it’s plain that he has no chance of being elected President.
Michael P. Delaney
Pasadena, Texas, U.S.

Is the U.N. Obsolete? In his essay disparaging the U.N., Charles Krauthammer argued that violence and greed are “the natural way of nations” [Oct. 23]. That is the lazy man’s excuse for resisting change and progress. As a means to create security and stability, war has failed over the millenniums. Our experiment in international collaboration, nonviolent conflict resolution and mutually beneficial partnerships—still in its infancy—will continue to suffer missteps and setbacks, not the least of which include the present U.S. Administration’s uninformed and shortsighted policies. My hope for the future lies in the goals, purposes and accomplishments of the U.N.
Peg Maher
Cedar Rapids, Iowa, U.S.

I applaud Krauthammer’s realistic take on the North Korean issue—that a “dynamic, capitalist, reunited Korea” would be stiff competition for a China that aspires to impose its will on East Asia, hence Beijing keeps its unruly neighbor alive and refuses to support tough U.N. sanctions against North Korea. Let’s hope for the sake of the Korean people that China does not succeed in promoting its self-interests and that there may be a reunited Korea before our lives are over.
Juwon Yang
Los Angeles

Krauthammer rightly commented that the U.N. has failed to achieve many of the goals for which it was established. Taiwan is well aware of this painful reality, having endured exclusion from the supposedly universal world body because of Chinese pressure for more than three decades. But there is no civilized alternative to the principle of international cooperation in pursuit of the common good. The world’s only hope for the ethical, nonviolent resolution of conflict lies in the collective cooperation of U.S.-led democracies. Give up that hope, and we are lost indeed.
Ben Shao
Taipei Economic and Cultural Office

New York City
It is time for western countries to find alternatives to the U.N. not only because it is incapable of preventing wars, as Krauthammer pointed out, but also because it has become an ideological bureaucracy that regards all cultural values as equal. While Islamic fundamentalists intimidate the West by manufacturing outrage against novels, cartoons, lectures, essays and theater productions, the U.N. complies with Muslim prohibitions against speaking freely about Islam. The freedom to think and express oneself—and even mock authority figures—is the bedrock of Western values, and to defend this freedom it appears necessary to disband the U.N. and develop other international and regional organizations.
Jiti Khanna
Vancouver

Cutting Our Losses
Leslie Gelb has got to be kidding [Oct. 23]. Can the terrorists in Iraq be deterred by mutual assured destruction, as the Russians were? Can we defense-spend them into oblivion? If we cut and run in Iraq, it will be annexed by Iran, a larger share of the world’s oil will be used as a weapon against the U.S., a Shi’ite majority will have free rein to commit genocide against Sunnis and Kurds, and the Shi’ites will have more money to buy arms for Hizballah.
Jose Ramirez
Lindenhurst, New York, U.S.

The U.S. must aid Iraqis as they develop their fledgling government, ensuring that oil profits are shared among the country’s factions. With more security, a new infrastructure and a government that they can have a say in, Iraqis could have a more hopeful and satisfying life, and a more stable region could be ensured. The U.S. should show that it isn’t interested in “owning” Iraq by eliminating most of its 14 bases there. That approach, however, would seem impossible under the current U.S. Administration. Fresh new faces and vision are needed for the world to see that we really want the best for the Iraqis.
Debbie Metke
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S.

Don’t Sneer at Our Heroes
Your interview with Clint Eastwood and your glowing review of his movie Flags of Our Fathers [Oct. 23] disparaged the idea of war heroism at a time when the U.S., in the hard years to come, is going to desperately need heroes and patriots. Although the movie is ostensibly about the World War II battle of Iwo Jima and our government’s propaganda campaign around the famous flag-raising photo, Eastwood obviously meant it as a comment on the Iraq war and the cynical machinations of the Bush Administration. I hold no brief for Bush and the Iraq war, but to attack them by sneering at the heroism and patriotism of Americans who served in an earlier, moral war is despicable.
Al Ramrus
Pacific Palisades, California, U.S.

Accession Woes
I enjoyed reading “When Reform Doesn’t Pay the Bills” [Oct. 23], on the struggling economies of the countries that have recently been admitted to the European Union. Although I cannot comment meaningfully on the entire region, your article failed to identify two of the main causes of problems in Hungary. First is an absence of leadership among the political élite: opposition parties are criticizing the current government but have not offered a credible alternative. Second, Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany has not been open about his family’s wealth, yet he chooses to raise taxes on the population. Unless Hungary’s leaders come clean about their affairs and demonstrate a willingness to make the system work not just for them but for the whole society, we cannot expect the people to believe in them.
Istvan Pataki
Budapest

Blind Faith
Re “When not Seeing is Believing” [Oct. 23]: Alarmed at the growing strength of fundamentalist religions, Andrew Sullivan suggested that “moderate,” “tolerant” and “humble” believers hold the key to religious peace and sensible politics. Nonsense. When in history has religion, however moderate, prevented or eliminated the ignorance and abuses of zealotry? Even a liberalized interpretation of the Bible, Koran or Talmud offers no guidance on human rights, constitutional guarantees, parliamentary democracy or international law. Those conventions and compacts had to be worked out by painstakingly applying unaided reason to the messy affairs of the real world. If we are to survive the current wave of reactionary fundamentalism, rational humanism once again will have to lead the way.
Charles Marxer
White Rock, Canada

Sullivan’s words of wisdom on fundamentalism and spiritual doubt need to be broadcast worldwide. Unfortunately those who are committed to absolutist religious (or political or economic) doctrines are incapable of participating in the kind of open-ended creative problem solving our present world situation requires.
Rosalie Taylor Howlett
London, Canada

Sullivan said that total, literal belief in ancient Scriptures of all kinds is a bad thing and that partial, selective belief is not so bad. Can we go one step further and assume that no belief at all would be best?
Andrew Staudzs
Winnipeg, Canada