US will not abandon Iraq
I wish to counter some of the anti-US bias in Sami Ranadani's otherwise excellent article ("From an old tyrant to a new one," Dec. 17, page 9). Yes, the US did make egregious mistakes in the past supporting former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein as well as many other cruel dictators, all in the madness of fighting our real and imagined enemies during the Cold War. Americans understand that era and the mistakes made in winning the Cold War.
What frustrates many Americans is the blind resistance, some of it very violent, to the US' sacrifice in Iraq, resistance that is accomplishing nothing but delaying the departure of the Americans and the arrival of prosperity for Iraqis.
We understand the resistance of the deposed Baathist rulers who would like to be in power and enjoy suppressing the Iraqi people again, and that of al-Qaeda fanatics, our only real enemies.
But we do not understand the anger of the significant numbers of others.
The US' purpose is not to take over Iraq, steal their oil or to suppress Islam. There is no sinister conspiracy. The war was vaguely about weapons of mass destruction (an issue misused by the administration of US President George W. Bush), but mostly to rid a cancerous element from the world's spider web of terrorism that is trying to destroy secular, free civilization.
We believe that the best way to stop the cancer of terrorism is to push more Arabs into a state of freedom, democracy and more prosperity. Iraq can be the beginning and the model of that movement.
Bush can't trumpet that too loudly because of the delicacy of relations with Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, but that is the reason he enjoys the backing of most Americans in this new era and new "war." We understand and believe in this greater goal.
The US troops would not be shooting at anyone if there were no fanatical crazed misguided resistance. Are all Arabs ignorant of US history except for the previous US support of Saddam and the previous British occupation?
Are none taught in school that the US sacrificed lives and immense amounts of money, while skillfully managing the complete recovery of a ravaged Europe and Japan back to prosperous and free societies -- then left.
Left, went home (except for some apolitical troops facing overwhelming Soviet troop strength on the other side of the Iron Curtain).
The US has never desired to occupy any other country -- there is no reason to -- we like ours too much.
And let me remind Ranadani what a real occupier looks like: it rounds up 20 or so citizens and shoots them for every soldier killed; it presses the occupied natives into sex camps and slave labor; and it does not repair schools, send in its citizens at great risk to teach self-government nor set up governing councils to write a constitution and organize free elections.
The overriding desire of all Americans and their government is to get out of Iraq. Trust me on this. This goal is being needlessly and bloodily delayed by the blind anti-Western Arab fanaticism. Iraq will have its elections and its self-destiny free of murderous dictators but it can't happen instantly.
The US must in its own long-term international interest assure that the ship is righted. And if somehow this administration, which is doing badly in public relations, were to lose sight of that objective, the next administration would quickly fix that because in the US the will of the people, later if not sooner, prevails.
But to those Iraqis who wish any amount of misery on their country in order to prevent US-sponsored success, I say think twice about blowing yourselves up because I am convinced that the American people are not going to abandon what we see as critical nation-saving objectives in Iraq.
Continuing to try to kill Americans and fellow Arabs who are trying to build Iraq will simply delay a return to normal life for the Iraqi people, who deserve their place in modern history.
Roland Dupree
United States
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs