War of the world
From Mr Geoffrey Regan Sir: As a British historian. I wish to say that in this current crisis I believe France speaks for the world, not Britain or the United States, The threat by President Chirac of using the French veto was justified by the fact that it was not designed to prevent an otherwise united Security Council from acting in a just cause. It was aimed to prevent two 'rogue states' from using the Security Council as a cloak for their aggression. At the time of the Korean crisis in 1950, the United Nations passed the Uniting for Peace resolution so that, in the event of one of the great powers using its veto to hamstring the Security Council, a twothirds majority in the General Assembly could overrule the veto.
If George Bush and Tony Blair believed that the French threat of the veto was unreasonable, they should have sought a two-thirds majority in the General Assembly, This would have proved one way or the other whether they really represented the wishes of the world to be rid of Saddam Hussein.
If, as seems certain, they were unable to win such a majority — by fair means or foul the legality that they claim for their actions would have been revealed as less valid than the so-called 'unreasonable veto' of the French.
Geoffrey Regan Lymington, Hampshire From Mr John E. Douglas Sir: As a Conservative, I am appalled at the current supine attitude of lain Duncan Smith over the Iraq situation. Instead of meekly supporting Blair and Bush, he should be wholeheartedly opposing British participation in this ludicrous enterprise.
To participate in a war will benefit only the USA while bringing opprobrium upon us from Islamic countries and making us the target of terrorist attacks. It will cost taxpayers billions of pounds in direct expenditure, not to mention the damage done to share prices and our economy. In terms of the UK's self-interest, there is absolutely nothing in it for us.
John E. Douglas Edinburgh From Mr Patrick Shervington
Sir: William Hague's brilliant apologia for the USA, warts and all (.The resentments of Old Europe', 15 March) left unsaid the political, economic, social and moral corollary — what next for the UK? The answer is plain. America is family, tiffs and all;
Europe is a group of friends or acquaintances. And that's it, for better or for worse.
Patrick Shervington North Wraxall, Wiltshire From Mr Guy Be/lairs Sir: William Hague is wrong to say that the USA has left democracy and freedom in its wake. Look at Nicaragua, Chile, Argentina, Mozambique, the Congo, Angola, East Timor, Vietnam, etc., with their toll of millions of lives. The USA is, naturally, hated by the survivors of these interventions, and their kin.
Guy Be/lairs Funchal, Madeira
Previous page
