Letters to the Editor
shaunnarine
Published Letters: 109 Editor's Choice: 20
-
cutthroat dating scene
[Read the article: I'm in a cutthroat dating scene]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Cary,
Two quick points: the basic rule of moral conduct is "do unto others as you would have them do to you." If you do not want someone else to steal your girlfriend/boyfriend/spouse etc., then do not follow an "ethical code" that allows you to act dishonorably towards others. A little bit of empathy goes a long way.
Second, learning to be alone in life is a pretty important part of growing up - just as important, and difficult, as learning to be with others. If people really are leaping from relationship to relationship just to avoid being alone then, I'm sorry, these people have issues that they need to confront.
Sincerely,
Shaun Narine
-
the road to jerusalem
[Read the article: All the father's men]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Editor,
It is almost certainly true that the road to peace in the Middle East - and some semblance of restoration of the United States' standing in the region - is through Jerusalem. If the US could really engineer a genuine and sustainable peace process that brings a just end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this would go a long way to alleviating regional antipathy towards the US. There are, however, at least two problems with this scenario.
First, getting out of Iraq is not easy. There is no clear indication that the US will leave that country anytime soon and even if it does, it will leave behind a terrible mess that will take years - perhaps generations - to clean up, with unknown consequences for the rest of the region. The US has created a problem in Iraq that was not there before and so it is not clear that resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict will do anything to help the situation in Iraq - though it certainly would not hurt, and it would do much to limit the present geopolitical maneuverings going on between the US, Israel, Iran and Syria.
The second problem is, perhaps, even more intractable: arriving at any sustainable peace in the Middle East cannot involve just beating the Palestinians into submission. It must also involve leaning on and, if necessary, punishing Israel and forcing it to make hard choices and difficult compromises - such as withdrawing its illegal settlements from the Occupied Territories and reaching compromises over the status of Jerusalem and compensation of Palestinians refugees. This leads to a clear problem: is any American administration capable of being truly tough with Israel? In particular, why should we expect George W. Bush - the most pro-Israeli American President in history - to suddenly start being unbiased in his approach to the Arab-Israeli conflict? Why should we expect this of the American Congress, which is, if anything, even more rabidly pro-Israel? (And this won't change under the new Democratic regime - if anything, it may get even worse).
The US has not been a true honest broker in the Middle East for the past 3 decades - despite American delusions to the contrary - and this tendency toward extreme bias in favour of Israel and against the Palestinians has only gotten worse as the years have gone on. Until the US can approach Israel with the genuine willingness to use its enormous economic and military aid to force Israel to make painful concessions, the Arab-Israeli conflict will drag on and the US will continue to facilitate the conflict by lopsidedly supporting one side. Along the way, the US will continue to undermine its standing, not just in the Islamic world, but everywhere else too.
Sincerely,
Shaun Narine
-
decisive year
[Read the article: A decisive year for "the decider"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dear Editor,
This is an interesting analysis, but I'm still waiting to see the Democrats actually do anything to turn around American foreign policy. Indeed, I don't think that they will. There are a few reasons for this. One, to undo the mess in Iraq and regain American influence in the world, the US government, both Congress and Administration, would need to radically alter the American approach to the Middle East. They would need to adopt policies that prove that their talk of democracy and fair play is something more than the hypocritical, racist drivel that it is currently widely perceived to be. Doing this, of course, means adopting a genuinely fair and even hand towards the Arab-Israeli conflict - and American political leaders are completely incapable of doing this. Leaning on Israel - an absolute necessity to bring about real peace in the region - is something no American political leader will do. Indeed, the rush to demonize Jimmy Carter for speaking the truth is instructive in exactly how afraid American politicians are of the pro-Israel lobby. So, American credibility in the Middle East -and in the larger international environment - will continue to hemmorhage.
Connected to this point, talking to Iran and Syria - and, by extension, groups like Hezbollah and Hamas- and trying to work out a genuine regional solution for the Iraqi mess also requires a shift in American Middle East policy - which won't happen for the same reasons noted above.
So, while Bush is caught in a mess of his own making, I wait to see what the Democrats will do to get the US out of that mess. The American public showed its displeasure with the war by voting for Democrats in the last election, but that was the easy part. Actually making the tough decisions needed to bring about real change requires a shift in American foriegn policy culture that no party seems prepared to make.
Sincerely,
Shaun Narine