New frigates

Press, 23 November 1988, Page 20

New frigates

Sir, —As M. Johnston (November 15) notes, I wrote that the Pacific has “potential warmakers.” Among them are the United States, whose 1973 worldwide “red alert” included Harewood, and the Soviet Union, which panicked that a United States first-strike was about to occur in November, 1983 (October 17, 1988). Five nuclear Powers have Pacific interests and no nation is available to facilitate confidence-building measures or peacemaking between them. In this situation, M. Johnston opposes peacemaking neutrality and calls siding with one nuclear Power against other(s) in any World War 111 “collective security”! As Coeur de la Cour says, we ourselves have no enemies. As Bob Jones adds, we create them needlessly by joining nuclear pacts with major Powers caught up in infantile power plays. Bob Jones commends unarmed Costa Rica as a model. Austria and Finland also demonstrate that neutrals need not have defence outlays on the scale of Sweden and Switzerland.—Yours, etc., J. GALLAGHER. November 15, 1988.

Sir, —I agree with J. M. Tocker (November 14), that throughout the ages man has relied on force to settle conflict. This method, while inflicting suffering on many, still allowed the human race to survive until recently. With the growth of technology, especially of the nuclear kind, we can no longer consider engaging in warfare. A nuclear war would have no winners. For that reason many people are searching for nonviolent answers to problems of conflict. We cannot turn back to World War II as a pattern for future behaviour. In a future war the Americans could well die for us, and we for them. The enemy would fare no better. Democracy would cease to exist and even civilisation itself would be threatened. It is futile to discuss alliances based on military strength. The human race, in order to survive, must find new answers to age-old questions.— Yours, etc., MARGARET BLACKER. November 19, 1988.