Letters

Missile defense melee

Paul Loeb misses the point on missile defense ("The money defense shield," July 25, opinion page).

Any missile coming our way must either be destroyed or countered with a nuclear strike of our own. The true potential of missile defense is that the president would have the time to confer with our forces, our allies, and our potential enemies. The alternative is that his window of action would be restricted to "a launch or don't launch" decision made within a few hectic minutes.

Being able to knock out one or several missiles without taking massive retaliatory action would be of great benefit to all mankind. President Bush, in his willingness to work with former and potential adversaries on this, appears to recognize that we may all be better off if each major nuclear power has at least a limited capacity to do the same.

Jim Woolsey

Sierra Vista, Ariz.

Paul Loeb cannot be dismissed as a wild-eyed radical, since his thinkingis in line with that of the justly revered President Dwight D.Eisenhower.

It is hard to know how we,as citizens, can take armsagainst this noxious misuse ofpublic money for spurious defense projects. I have no really good ideas on this; but a start might be to write a letter of support to Senator Biden, head of the Senate committee that dealswith "star wars," and one who knows very well that its likely outcome will be not to protect the citizenry, but to further destabilize the arms situation in the world.

Joan Campion

Bethlehem,Penn.

United States history is full of broken treaties with those who have been in the way of our getting what we want. We are about to decide again between honor and arrogance: the ABM treaty or missile defense.

Lynn Olson

Deming, N.M.

We are willing to spend billions to reduce trace amounts of arsenic from our drinking water, but are reluctant to spend enough to save a US city from annihilation by a rogue or accidental missile launch.

The destruction of a modified Minuteman II ICBM launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California by an interceptor missile launched July 14 from Kwajalein Atoll, some 4,800 miles away, demonstrates once again that defending American cities against accidental or rogue nuclear missiles is a political, not a technological problem.

Daniel Sobieski

Chicago

Your July 23 editorial, "Indonesia as a model" contains the assertion that having a woman as leader is "a rarity in Asia."

That must come as a bit of a surprise to the eight or more women who have served as president or prime minister of their countries in the modern era, including one who led the second-most-populous-nation in the world.

Among the Asian women who have served in a national leadership position I count: Indira Gandhi of India; Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan; Begum Sheikh Hazina and Begum Zia, both of Bangladesh; Corazon Aquino and Gloria Arroyo of the Philippines; and Mrs. Chandrika Bandaranaike Kumaratunga, president of Sri Lanka as well as her mother, Srimavo Ratwatte Dias Bandaranaike. I know of no other region in the world that has had as many women leaders as Asia.

Joseph J. Stern

Senior Fellow, Asia Programs

John F. Kennedy School of Government

Harvard University

Cambridge, Mass.

The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles. Due to the volume of mail, only a selection can be published, and 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.

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 oped@csps.com.