Good war or bad peace

Sir, - Apropos the write-up `Never a good war, or a bad peace' (Oct. 28), I, for one, do not understand what the anti-war activists want the U.S. to do. Even before the September 11 terrorist attack, no country (except Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE) was ready to recognise the Taliban Government. So, post- September 11, there is no question of the U.S. signing a treaty with the Taliban for the extradition of Osama bin Laden. It is doubtful whether Mullah Omar would have consented to sign such a treaty.

As for taking the matter to the U.N., since all the veto-wielding permanent Security Council member-countries are behind the U.S. in its campaign against terrorism, it is akin to getting the U.N. backing. People who talk of political strategy fail to understand that one cannot negotiate with a bunch of fanatics who believe in eliminating key political figures just to stay in power. And peaceniks, who complain now about the loss of innocent lives, only demonstrate their naivete. What did they think before the war began? That the U.S. had precision bombs which would search for and hit only Osama bin Laden and his ilk?

Raghav Venkatesh,

Gulbarga, Karnataka

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Opinion
Previous : Fanatical attitude
Next     : A great escape?