Letters to the Editor

Readers write about race relations, nuclear technologies, climate change, language, and Memorial Day politics.

from the June 1, 2007 edition

Page 2 of 2

Page 1 | 2

Expanding opportunities to learn Arabic

The May 17 article, "Why the pool of Arabic speakers is still a puddle," notes that post-9/11 increases in Americans learning Arabic have slowed.

At The American University in Cairo (AUC), we see a more encouraging story. The number of students applying and coming to AUC's Arabic Language Institute for intensive and advanced Arabic has increased every year in the past five. As Arabic language programs at US universities expanded and improved, so, too, has the quality of students coming to Cairo for advanced study. There are currently 160 Americans engaged here at various levels of intensive Arabic and about 300 more learning the language as part of their undergraduate courses.

The Center for Arabic Study Abroad (CASA), a consortium of 21 US universities, has been sending American graduate students to AUC for intensive, advanced Arabic for 40 years. Next month CASA extends that program to the University of Damascus; and our Cairo program will expand further as we move to our new campus next year.

Fluent Arabic is still all too rare a skill for American journalists, business executives, and diplomats working in the Middle East. But the opportunities for those who want to learn are still expanding.

Ali S. Hadi
Vice provost and director of graduate studies and research, The American University in Cairo
Cairo

Politics is part of Memorial Day

I am writing in response to Paul Morin's May 25 Opinion piece, "Keep politics out of Memorial Day." I must profoundly disagree with Mr. Morin's conclusions. I should probably note here that I come from a military family.

Military conflict is by definition a political exercise. While we might want to divorce the loss of life from the context in which it occurs, this is an unhealthy and ultimately self-defeating piece of mental gymnastics. It allows us to hide from some very unpleasant issues, but it doesn't make them go away. It allows us to honor the dead without considering whether or not at least some of their blood is on our hands. It allows us to salute their sacrifice, while avoiding the question "Was it worth it?"

I assert that asking the question "Was it worth it?" does not dishonor the service and sacrifice of our military forces – quite the opposite, in fact. I don't know of a single service man or woman who doesn't serve hoping against hope that their children and grandchildren and great-great-grandchildren won't have to.

When we send our service men and women to die in ill-conceived, ill-planned, poorly executed, and potentially counterproductive conflicts, when we follow bad leadership, when we refuse to stand up for what we feel is right – that is when we dishonor the service of all who came before.

Loré McLaren
Truckee, Calif.

The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Because of the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number. Any letter accepted may appear in print or on our website, www.csmonitor.com.

Mail letters to Readers Write and opinion articles to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to (617) 450-2317, or e-mail to Op-Ed.

1 | Page 2