Letters to the Editor

European union

Sir: As foretold, prior to the Referendum, by those campaigning against EEC membership, the spectre of close economic and monetary union is now raising its ugly head.

It should, so says the Common Market Commission, have this aim of eventual union of member countries as its main objective.

Mr Tindemans, the Belgian Prime Minister, has been asked by the nine member governments to write a report on European union by the end of the year, and will soon be seeking views in Britain.

All those who scoffed at any loss of sovereignty by remaining a member — take note of this most fundamental of Community. issues. It will be strongly resisted in this country by all those who care for Britain's retainment of sovereignty of self-government.

J. G. Hill Hon. Secretary, Conservative Trident Group, The Willows, 1 Woodford Close, Ringwood, Hants Sir: 'Mr Anthony McCall appears to think that closer ties with Europe should lead to the enrichment of our culture, which our insularity will hinder or even lead to cultural impoverish57 ment. The history of cultures and the arts does not support this view. No civilised country was more insular than Japan during its period of isolation, which lasted until late in the nineteenth century; yet the culture which that country then developed is, in its richness and originality, still the admiration of the world. The Japanese may have no reason to regret their decision to participate in the life of modern nations, but surely it is not seriously suggested that it has led to the enrichment of their culture. Shakespeare wrote when this country was as insular as ever, but 'he was not thereby prevented from writing immortal plays based on stories originating in other lands and climes. Germany's contribution to culture is, I suppose, mainly musical and philosophical and was made when it was divided into a very large number of principalities. The art of the Italian Renaissance was likewise produced long before Italy's unification. The separate states of Germany and Italy were 'not islands as Britain is, but the truth about them weakens Mr McCall's argument.

It would be an exaggeration to say that the preservation of our culture depends on our resignation from the EEC, but a stronger argument in support of that proposition could be produced than that of Mr McCall.

My view is that politicians can do nothing by their efforts either to enrich or impoverish culture, though governments can easily provide museums for the preservation of past cultural achievements.

I think that the argument about our membership of the EEC might soon be re-opened. I would urge all your readers, including Mr McCall, if they again have to make up their minds, to disregard any proposition which refers to culture; for it has nothing to do with it.

D. E. Follies 5 Queen's Walk, London ,W5

Made in the US

Sir: In the light of the recent decision of the Belgians to buy the American General Dynamics F-16 fighter in preference to the French Mirage for their air force, might I suggest a new policy for the EEC?

The pro-Marketeers told us before the referendum that we in Britain had to remain in the EEC because (a) it would be a new independent power block which would giye us a voice in the world and (b) our sense of independence outside of the EEC was a mere illusion as 'real' decisions are all made in Europe.

What kind of power block gets its weapons from outside its own frontiers? It seems to me that the pro-Marketeers must now argue the case for the entire EEC to apply for membership of the US as another state. Our claim to independence is surely hollow if we depend for our defence on another world power. With real economic and military decisions made in Washington the 'independence' of 'Europe' is an illusion. Remember the fate of the Polish and East German aircraft industries?

If one carries the pro-Marketeers' logic to its ultimate rationality, one argues for the entire world applying for associate membership of heaven as members of God's advisory committee because that's where 'real' power lies. Is it not time that those in positions of power and authority in this country stopped passing the bucl$ (and I don't just mean dollars)?

James Harbord 256 Linnet Drive, Chelmsford, Essex

Israel and the Arabs

Sir: Congratulations on your excellent editorial 'Lebanon, the guerrillas and the Arab world' (July 5), in which you say, 'Up to this moment Israel has been offered absolutely nothing from her Arab neighbours which would guarantee her existence, let alone the ability to defend and preserve her security.'

In order to achieve peace, the Arabs must accept as part of a final peace settlement, for which there is no indication that any of the powers is pressing them, the normalisation of relations between the Arab states and Israel. This means trade, tourism and diplomatic relations. Since 1967 there has already been a limited amount of trade and tourism. However, an agreement by the Arab states to diplomatic relations is vital. Once this is agreed in principle Israel would then be in a position to offer real concessions, and contrariwise, until this is accepted any Israeli withdrawal remains a serious security risk. • Therefore, the Western powers, if they are really interested in peace, must press the Arabs to accept an exchange of diplomatic missions with Israel. David M. Jacobs I la Lyndale Avenue, London NW2

Britain and Rhodesia

Sir: I fear I cannot fully agree with the content of 'No Rhodesian role' in 'A Spectator's Notebook' (July 5). Lord Home's successful negotiations in 1971 were certainly a strong card which should have been a winning one. Unfortunately it was 'ruffed' by the findings of the Pearce Commission.

It is also something more than ironic that a commission might not even have been considered necessary had it not been for the 'sixth principle', laid down, at a much earlier date, and almost as an afterthought, by Lord Home himself.

0. S. Swainson Hon. Secretary, Friends of Rhodesia in the Isle of Man, Thie-ny-Chibbyr, Colby, Isle of Man

Defence policies

From Commander Edgar P. Young, RN(Re td) Sir: Far from despising such 'old-fashioned" values as service and dedication', as David Wragg suggests (Letters, July 5), I would like to see them applied more sincerely, by our country in particular, in the formulation and conduct of policy, both internal and international, In taking him up on what he wrote in his article in your issue of June 19, I made use of a categorisation which he had used, 'diplomatic and military circles', which he has attempted to narrow down to 'senior members of the armed forces', and which I would now like to qualify. Senior members of the armed forces seldom express themselves publicly on the subject here under discussion. When they do so, it is usually on the eve of, or soon after, their retirement from some important Nato post, when they already have an' eye to remunerative employment in civil life. Their 'opinions' are patently worded with a view to securing such employment, and are widely quoted by those who do have a vested interest in maintaining, and even increasing, defence expenditure.

There have been occasions, however, when senior members of the armed forces have expressed themselves very clearly in a sense very different from that propounded by David Wragg and many others of his way of thinking, but these are not widely publicised, because the news media find them 'inconvenient'. A good example of this is what was said by Air Vice-Marshal S. W. B. Menaul, director-general of the Royal United Services Institute, on February 3,1971, at the conclusion of a seminar of highly competent experts — real ones — on 'Britain's Role East of Suez' which I would quote here verbatim:

'I do not believe that any of us who have studied this problem in detail really believes that the Russians are moving into the Indian Ocean with the express intention of sinking allied merchant ships. In fact, the presence of the Russians in the Indian Ocean today is primarily defensive, which is traditional Russian naval policy. I think they are currently far more concerned in the activities of American nuclear submarines in the Indian Ocean which are capable of hitting targets simultaneously in Russia and China. They were unable to do that before they had the 3,500-mile Polaris Mark III missiles and now Poseidon.'

Since that authoritative opinion was expressed, although Britain may have reduced her naval presence in the Indian Ocean, as David Wragg asserts, contrary to his assertion, France has increased hers, and so have the United States, with the result that the balance of naval power there has increased in favour of Nato. It is now being actively proposed to increase this still further by major extension of naval and air facilities on our island of Diego Garcia, expressly for the servicing of US task forces in the area. Yet David Wragg now writes, conceding the point made in my last letter, that the Soviet Union has proposed explicitly the dismantling of all foreign bases in the Indian Ocean and the withdrawal from it of all foreign warships and military aircraft, that 'as always, Soviet words and actions differ'. Anticipating that this qualification may be challenged, he makes the obviously ridiculous assertion that the Soviet Union has 'no overseas trade routes vital to its national survival to protect,' either there or, presumably in the Mediterranean and in the Atlantic!

The trouble is, if I may say so, that commmentators like David Wragg base their views on widely publicised statements made by such people as our present Minister of Defence, Mr Roy Mason, the US Defence Secretary, Mr Schlesinger, or the American Assistant Secretary-General of Nato, Dr Gardiner

Tucker, which are supposed to be authentic and authoritative. When one looks into the matter, however, it transpires that these 'authorities' base themselves on material derived from

such sources as Jane's Fighting Ships etc. (which I used to take as 'gospel' when I was at my prep school) and from documents published by the Institute for Strategic Studies and the Institute for the Study of Conflict, the objectivity and credibility of which are as questionable as those of the CIA, which also feeds these 'authorities' With lies and misrepresentation.

The foregoing supposition is borne out further, I suggest, by the 'back ground' material on which these commentators profess to base their 'strategic' calculations. David Wragg, for instance, professes to contrast the result of allegedly 'imperialistic' action of the Soviet Union in having 'occupied half of Europe by force' (we welcomed it as 'liberation, when millions of Soviet lives were being sacrificed in our common cause against Hitlerism and Fascism), with that obtaining in 'the West', where (allegedly) 'any nation can opt out, into neutrality, or even Communism.' He admits, perhaps inadvertently, that the 'half of Europe'. for which we should shed tears is 'a

.developed half with a politically sophisticated populace at that', which

some parts of it, at any rate, were not, in the past, and would not be today were it not for the assistance and 'political education provided by the Soviet Union. But he conveniently overlooks what has happened in Greece since 1944, and what has been threa tened to Italy and France (with pointed US 'naval presence' in their ports) Whenever they had had parliamentary elections since 1945, not to mention what has happened in Guyana, Domin ica and Chile, to 'mention just a few places further afield. It is not I, David Wragg, who have 'forgotten' this history, but you, if you ever knew it, as I did, sometimes as a participant in its making.

Edgar P. Young 101 Clarence Gate Gardens, Glen tworth Street, London NW1

Insulting to Catholics

Sir: Usually I find The Spectator most enjoyable; the comment that it contains IS both incisive and topical. Occasionally what appears is a point of view Which differs from my own; today's issue (July 5) has in it, however, what 5p pears to be a needless and gratuitous insult to the many Catholics who will be numbered among your readers. In his review of Derek Parker's book, Familiar to All, William Sargant, in his third paragraph, will have caused great distress to many readers by his references to Catholic belief in the objective reality of the events which are unfolded in the Sacred Liturgy of the Mass. He is perfectly entitled to his point of view, which is subjective, what IS totally objectionable is his manner of expression, and the implications which he wishes your readers to see in his

[Correspondents are asked to give a telephone number whenever possible (not for publication), so that tiona fides can be verified.

remarks. They are not a true comment on the book which he is reviewing in your pages, and reveal more of him than they do of the book itself.

Bernard J. Hills, 184 Adelphi Street, Preston. Lancashire

Insulting to workers

Sir: The cartoon by Mik (July 5) is offensive with its implication that the perquisites of privilege are acceptable if available to the 'upper classes' but funny-ridiculous if aspired to by mere miners, who ought not to ape their betters but remain uncomplaining in that station in life where the Lord has placed them.

K. M. Gillen 710 Nelson House, Dolphin Square, London SWI

Independent University

Sir: You say, on the leading page of the issue of June 28, that the very strength and variety of contributors to this first major conference highlights the absurdity of the decision of the Council for National Academic Awards not to offer degree status to the IU.'

May 1 say that, to my way of thinking, this is itself a rather absurd statement? The ability to draw up a 'formidable battery of economic and political contributors' for a crisis conference bears little or no relationship to the ability to draw up undergraduate curricula.

I wonder why you feel so strongly about the CNAA? And I also wonder why, if you support an IU so strongly, you do not draw an obvious conclusion — that the IU should award its own degrees and thus assert in the clearest terms a genuine independence? There is nothing whatsoever to stop it doing so.

Bryan Thwaites Principal, Westfield College (University of London), Kidderpore Avenue, London NW3

Moscow tourist

Sir: For its childishness and philistinism Kate Wharton's article about Moscow and Leningrad would take some beating. I, too, am anticommunist, and I agree that many communist cities make a frigid impression (though I find that this is by now so well known as to have become a cliche). But Ms Wharton complains at the style of service and the prices of exactly those things which the experienced budget-tourist has learned to avoid: hotels with dancefloors, champagne, guided bus tours, special wishes for service in the hotel-room, etc. Of course, Ms Wharton may not be a budget-tourist, and many travellers probably do not feel that their holiday is a real holiday without such luxuries Or extras, but they will have to be prepared to pay for them, and not only in communist Moscow. As to the inability of Kate Wharton's abler-eyed companions (not too difficult to be abler-eyed than that lady, I should imagine) to find a restaurant in Moscow, I vote this tourist-joke no. 1, 1975. although I must confess that acquaintances of mine once returned disappointed from several days' stay in Madrid without knowing that the old city, the Cavas, Plaza Mayor, the Rastro or the labyrinth of `tasca'-bars round Cruz/ Victoria existed. It can be done!

However, I feel that someone who casually spurns 'old churches' and thinks that `St Basil's . . . made of seaside rock ... deserves to melt in the mid-day sun' has little to tell us, anyway. St Basil's is an incredible structure: a superb example of external detail hiding a masterly ground-plan. One large, four small and four miniature churches make up the complex, built in the mid-sixteenth century. (Imagine liat St Eustache, Paris and St Peter's, Rome were under construction at the same time!) St Basil's may not be beautiful by our standards, but then neither are a host of other fascinating historical buildings throughout the communist and non-communist world.

Kate Wharton is, of course, fully entitled to her opinions, but I suggest that she should try to recognise her weaknesses, in particular the childish extremism of her subjectivity, and not express her silly views with quite such dogmatism.

Peter Haringay 29 Harford Road, Bristol

Reliable translation

Sir: Miss Arianna Sassinopoulis highlights the difficult question of what is a reliable translation in quoting Professor Hugh Lloyd-Jones's thesis that 'a translation of a poem is either a bad poem or an unfaithful rendering' (June 14). For this means that if a good poem, or a poem that correctly interprets the mood of the original work, is necessarily the result of an unfaithful rendering then there is more to the art of translation than merely transcribing words, and linguistic accuracy is not the same as reliability.

What applies to poetry also applies to other material. In discussing legislation on pollution, the Common Market Commissioners neatly avoided this problem by deciding it was better to allow river pollution to continue unabated rather than embroiling themselves in the fruitless task of 'harmonisation of dictionaries'. Formulation of laws to combat pollution require a legal definition of 'waste': but 'waste', like many other words, cannot have one fixed meaning applicable to all countries, firms and individuals. Just as 'one man's meat is another man's poison', so one man's waste is another man's building materials, one firm's effluent is another firm's raw material or a farmer's fertiliser. 'Waste' can mean everything or nothing, and legislation would effectively prevent re-cycling of such things as waste paper and scrap metal,both of which are also important inclucolal raw materials.

The difference between a linguistically accurate translation and a reliable translation is the difference between an apprentice chef following cook-book recipes and an experienced chef who knows when and when not to vary the ingredients and other factors. For this reason reports based on listening-in to foreign broadcasts of local news, or descriptions of customs of other countries, can be highly misleading.

Twenty years ago various countries considered that translation was simply a matter of replacing the foreign words with their English (or appropriate language) equivalents as listed in dictionaries, and embarked on programmes to develop translating machines. It was soon realised, however, that good results could not be achieved through simple word-forword translation but only by translating whole sentences. Even so, the results were as incomprehensible as the original works, and translators were still required to recast the machine translations into understandable English.

The British Government alone has spent tens of millions of pounds on the futile development of translating machines in which even a minor improvement requires a vast amount of circuitry. If the government had confined its attention to the construction of machine dictionaries a very worthwhile and valuable aid could have been made available at an extremely low cost. They could now be on sale in shops alongside pocket calculators, and indistinguishable from the latter as regards size.

A. J. H. Brown 46 Merryton Avenue, Giffnock, Glasgow