Russian moves in Afghanistan

Press, 20 February 1980, Page 22

Russian moves in Afghanistan

Sir, — M. Creel (February 18) exhibits the very fault of which he accuses me- by substituting his own vehement assertions for tangible fact. His refusal to accept the reports of independent news agencies (including many of a distinctly noncapitalist kind) is either political paranoia or that form of ideological, blindness causing its victim to see only in red. A huge army of occupation heavily engaged in suppressing Afghan resistance is an accurately reported fact. So is the flood of refugees across the Pakistani border, the puppet Karmal regime’s inability to exercise authority, and the refusal by most of the world’s governments to extend recognition. I do not expect M. Creel to feel overpowered by such evidence — only that he recognise that those with a more balanced view (including some Communist governments) are. The treaty he upholds is irrelevant to the essential issue of whether the Afghan people desired its (sic) implementation — res ipsa loquitur. — Yours, etc ? • • • " D. J. O’ROURKE. February 18, 1980.

Sir, — Letting Russia have Afghanistan while the American Secretary of. Defence says a conflict in the Gulf “might spread to Europe as far north as Norway” is a formula for a third world war and is sheer madness. According to recent reports, the people of Afghanistan are putting up a magnificent fight against the Russian invasion. If an international force were assembled composed of volunteers from the Commonwealth, the Muslim nations, China and America; I believe the Russians could be persuaded to give up

their ill-judged enterprise and to retreat within their own borders. The Russian Government has not told its subjects what it is doing and could withdraw with little loss of face. If we say we do not want a major war, but that they cannot have Afghanistan, I believe such a show of firmness would reduce the risk of a third world war. — Yours, etc., MARK D. SADLER. February 18, 1980.

Sir, — Your regular correspondent, M. Creel, goes to dubious lengths to justify the Afghanistan invasion. It is difficult to justify any invasion of an independent country but what makes this invasion more ominous is that, for the Russians, it is only one of a series. It is part of a selfproclaimed aim of world domination. A major weakness of the Soviet system is that it is unable to tolerate opposition at home or abroad so it acts in its own cold-blooded way. Brezhnev may • not be the most ruthless man in the Soviet Politburo but he is still no angel. He has claimed to have exterminated 57,000 of his own countrymen because they collaborated with the Germans and Rumanians during World War 11. Old habits die hard. I feel apprehensive for the Afghanis and whoever is next on the invasion list. —Yours, etc., M. J. CAMBRIDGE, Blenheim. February 15, 1980.