September 99 letters to editor
The current debate in US Senate weather to approve ratify the CTBT or not explains clearly that US is never going to give up it's Nukes to create Nuke free world.
I think, like everybody else, Senate will postpone the voting rather then displaying the real US intentions of ,may be, never ratifying it. What is USA losing by signing a treaty which comes into effect only when ALL the nuclear capable nations ratify it.
In spite of it advantageous ability to test the nukes in lab, which is not prohibited in CTBT and other countries doesn't have the ability to do so, USA has so much of dilemma to ratify CTBT.
If US, with all it's superiority in the conventional weapons, sees a need for a nuke bomb there is no wonder other countries are interested in it.
Either US should ratify the current treaty and work for a nondiscriminatory global disarmament, like a true leader or stop bullying other nation to sign CTBT.
Selvi Venkat,
Bloomington,IL
10/13/99
The recent events in Pakistan leading to a military coup are rather unfortunate for that country. While democracy in Pakistan was causing enough headaches for India by openly touting terrorism across the border, a military regime there is certain to raise even more major security concerns for India. The recent events in Pakistan have clearly overshadowed the victory achieved by India over the Kargil issue by raising new fears. India is doing the right thing by putting all the three armed forces at top alert in anticipation of problems.
While the exact motivations of the new regime in Pakistan are unpredictable at this time, it can be reasonably expected that it will lead to increased Taliban activities in Kashmir. Pakistan's nuclear pursuit could also escalate to new heights creating new dangers to its neighbors. In the interests of world security, restoration of democracy in Pakistan must become a top priority for the rest of the world. This can only be achieved by isolating and not supporting the military regime by any means.
To the incumbent Vajpayee government, it is perhaps the most opportune time to realize that addressing the symptoms alone are no longer sufficient. Instead of merely addressing isolated terrorist events here and there as they occur, the new government must come up with a decisive strategy to neutralize the problem at its root and must act with determination, should a major conflict with Pakistan erupt. Where diplomacy has no chance to work, only such a strategy could lead to lasting peace.
Murali Natarajan
Bloomington, IL 61704
mnataraj@us.ibm.com
10/13/99
I couldn't stop my temptation to write this letter after watching US Senate's CTBT debate.
US was the first country to sign it and first to KILL it. In the mean time pressurized everybody to 'follow' US.
The reason used in favour of singing the treaty is not because it could be first step towards a "non discriminatory total nuclear disarmament". It is just to "lock in" US's lead in Nuke technology and it can test in the laboratory itself.
The reason used for opposing not that the treaty bad. It is because US's lack of faith in other countries. US thinks it will honour the treaty but others are bound to cheat. It doesn't even want to believe the 30 nation committee which will inspect the suspected sight. US wants to be able to verify 'independently' if it has to ratify, an argument never used when it was ratified in UK and France. It just highlights US's suspicion at everyone else, while other nation willing to believe the earthly neighbor.
Pakistan coup added spice to the debate. It has been sighted to show how dangerous the world has become and the US's need to 'strengthen' it's 'nuclear deterrence'.
A reason US not willing to accept for India's "minimum credible nuclear deterrence". US dubs it as a 'step in wrong direction'.
How to explain this step?
Venkat Sellappan
Bloomington,IL,USA-61704
10/15/99
Under pressure from the Pakistani pressure groups, the Foreign Relations Committee under the Chairmanship of Rep. Jesse Helms (R-NC) goof-up by by supporting Pakistani attempts to take International attention away from the events happening in Pakistan, by trying to belittle India.
In their letter addressed to President Clinton, dated 28/29th September, and signed by over 46 representatives, and 15 senators including Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD), and reps. Dan Burton (R-IN) David Bonior (D-MI) Tom Campbell (R-CA) Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL). tried to undermine Indo-US relations, and put the US on the false path of pacifying the Islamic Pakistan and its Military dictatorship. One wonders whether such letters are indeed genuine or are they an attempt to please the Islamic lobbies in Pakistan, and gain monetary benefits. These are the same islamic lobbies that could be connected to the various islamic organizations which had financed the US embassy bombing, and cost American lives. These Senators, and reps. need to be more aware about the realities of such pseudo-pacifict Islamic lobbies operating the US.
Vishal Sharma
INDIA.
10/25/99
U.S. Energy Secretary Bill Richardson said recently that the U.S. continues to believe that India is better off without nuclear weapons, that nukes are bad for India's security. He wants India to sign the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, impose a moratorium on nuclear weapons production, stop developing missiles and strengthen controls over exporting nuclear material.
Consider this scenario. Suppose one or more nations call upon the U.S. to:
Suppose they claim that these steps will be good for the U.S. security, and will make the world a safer place.
How would America react? Would such meaningless and insensitive suggestions result in a change of policy? Will the United States give up its nukes and abandon its military just because a demand was made, or would it continue to act independently to safeguard its security and sovereignty?
It is time for the Clinton administration officials to get real. They must stop trying to impose upon other nations what they themselves are not willing to do. If nuclear weapons are not good, then the U.S. must eliminate its nukes first, followed by pressuring Russia, China, U.K. and France to do the same.
It is time for the United States to lead by example.
Sincerely,
Mohana Kher
Bloomington IL
10/25/99
Congratulations!!!
I think I'll check The Progressive very often. Please allow me some questions.
In the context of your Philosophy statement: why promote the arts and humanities? How does it relates to the responsabilities of the Citizens?
Pablo S.
The position of the JP is that a prominant role for the arts and humanities is essential to the proper functioning of a democratic society. We are working on an essay on the subject to be published in the JP. -- Editor
10/26/99
Dear Sir/Ma'am
Well, As I sit here in Lincoln NE, I thank god for being so good to me. I pray everyday that god help all those who do not see the light "see the light!"
I read the article on SBC Prayer Book and I must say that I am offended by their active interference in my religion. Freedom of Speech DOES NOT equate to hurting/offending other human beings without provocation.
While I may not be able to "see the light" as SBC puts it, I just see enough "light" to realize what RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY means and how much of it is freely available in this GREAT nation of ours! (no pun intended) Someone please ask these folks what the word "secular" means.
For me the religion I practice is a very personal matter. It is worse than being called a "name" when SBC suggest that obviously, I live in "Darkness!" They know better! BTW, the "light" is pretty bright where I am sitting right now. Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but isn't it a federal crime if one is called a "name" with racial connotation? To me, what SBC is suggesting is a bigger crime than being called a "racially motivated name etc." I know because I have been called names.
I would say that someone has to "slap" me really hard to get me to post my opinion. Here I am!
Now, I have not read the Bible or Bhagavat Gita. I don't go to a church/temple everyday or once a week. I guess I am not "religiously active." But, what I do know is that Jesus DOES NOT preach what SBC is preaching! "Spreading the Word" DOES NOT mean converting. Jesus did not say that conversion to Christianity was/is a requirement for a young boy or a girl to attend a missionary school out in some developing country where these missionaries think they can make their own rules because no one is paying attention! (ro - sorry!) Beware! Jesus is watching you. If you think that he will forgive you for twisting his words, you are mistaken!
So netizens, Please help me help our sadly misguided brothers and sisters at SBC to come out of the "DARK AGES" and join us as one family as we approach the NEW MILLENIUM (21st Century!). It is only when they realize that we are not in the "DARK AGE" they will understand that the goal of every religion is to bring up human beings with attributes such as INEGRITY, CHARACTER, LOYALTY etc. This "ability" to raise outstanding human beings is not a "Registered Trademark" owned by Southern Baptist Church! Thank you for allowing me to share my thoughts.
God Speed!
Duke Patel
Lincoln NE