Frigates

Press, 28 April 1989, Page 10

Frigates

Sir,—M. Johnston’s claim (April 21)' that “proponents of neutrality should ponder the fate of neutral Denmark, Norway, Finland, Estoni|i, Latvia and

Lithuania in World war II" is misleading, to say the least. The Finns admired Hitler from the 1920 s and joined fully in his invasion of Russia in 1941. Thousands of Estonian, Latvian and Lithuanian troops also invaded Russia with the Nazis. Many Latvian Fascists were active in S.S. extermination squads during 1941-44, and the other countries mentioned all had their quota of vocal and active Nazis, with Quisling of Norway the most notoriouus. Some neutrality, indeed. — Yours, etc., M. T. MOORE. April 21, 1989.

Sir,—ln response to M. Johnston (April 21), the fact that a Government sets parameters for naval operation does not absolve it of the obligation to justify those parameters both militarily and economically. Both the Government and the military professionals have utterly failed to provide that justification except to say, as does M. Johnston, that we need frigates to rejoin A.N.Z.U.S. Many in the peace movement argue convincingly that A.N.Z.U.S. is a potential suicide pact which in no way guarantees our security. M. Johnston seems muddled on the role of our Ortons. There has never been a verified sighting of a Soviet submarine within thousands of kilometres of our shores, let alone within our E.E.Z. The Soviet military has no reason to be in this part of the world. If freed from futile antisubmarine duties, our Ortons could be effective in detecting surface vessels fishing illegally. But we need fast, lightly armed patrol ships for follow-up enforcement. Ortons and frigates are inefficient, if not useless, in that role. — Yours, etc.,

ROBERT L. LEONARD. April 24, 1989.