Letters to the Editors

Sanctions against Iraq are cruel and ineffective

© St. Petersburg Times, published June 19, 2000

Re: Iraq: A deadly waiting game, June 4, 5 and 6.

Thank you for the recent three-part series on the U.S./U.N. sanctions against Iraq. Although this policy kills more than 150 Iraqi children each day, it is virtually invisible to most Americans. After so much ink and air time spent on Elian Gonzalez, it was fitting that the Times should also report on Iraqi children such as Nawaf Nassir, the 6-year-old Iraqi boy dying of leukemia. The sanctions prohibit the medicine and medical technology that could cure him.

Although some of your readers complained about the grisly images, I applaud the Times for reporting about the people who are directly suffering from U.S. policy. Too often we hear only about Saddam Hussein and nothing about the other 22-million people of Iraq, over 1.2-million of whom have died as a direct result of the sanctions.

The criticism of Hussein by U.S. officials cited in the series is ironic, since prior to the Persian Gulf war, the United States supported Hussein and his dictatorship. The silver spurs given to Hussein by Ronald Reagan, which were mentioned in one article, were not the only gifts from the United States. In the late '80s, during the Iraq-Iran War, the U.S. government approved the sale to Iraq of $1.5-billion worth of biological agents and high-tech equipment with military application, fully aware that Hussein was using chemical and biological weapons against Iranians and Kurds. The current sanctions are merely a continuation of U.S. indifference to the Iraqi people, and our recent history demonstrates that the United States is in no moral or political position to determine the fate of Iraq.

The sanctions are not only morally wrong, they are also politically counterproductive. Before the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein and his Baath party, though politically oppressive and ruthless with political opponents, provided a good standard of living, adequate housing, good wages, free education and excellent medical care for the Iraqi people. The sanctions have destroyed all that, making it easy for Hussein to use the sanctions -- and the bombs and missiles dropped on Iraqi civilians by U.S. warplanes -- to consolidate his power.

Given all this, it is hardly surprising that France, Russia and Canada, as well as 70 members of Congress, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark and growing numbers of citizens around the world have called for an end to the sanctions.

I hope the Times will continue to report on the effects of U.S. policy on Iraq, particularly the ongoing bombings and missile attacks by Western warplanes. Too often these reports, if they appear at all, are reduced to a few lines buried deep in section A.

Elian Gonzalez and U.S. policy toward Cuba became a major political issue because of extensive news coverage. The children of Iraq deserve no less.
-- John Stewart, St. Petersburg

A needed wake-up call

Re: June 12 letters responding to the Times series Iraq: A deadly waiting game.

Would those letter writers have even thought of the horrors of war if they had not been confronted with the picture of that stillborn baby on Memorial Day? Perhaps now more people will be aware of the truth our own veterans are trying to get their government to understand about their "mysterious" ailments. And maybe they can get help.

Perhaps "love your neighbor" (even halfway around the world) will have more meaning for Americans insulated from the horrors of war, and we will do more to ensure peace rather than war. Wake up and smell the coffee. Get involved in politics, church or whatever will make this world a better place for everyone.

By the way, a 7-year-old is not too young to know there are monstrous evils being done in this world. But let the child know that his/her parents are involved in activities to help eradicate such horrors. Let the child see his parents working to help others.
-- Barbara L. Startup, Clearwater

Putting the focus on sanctions

Re: Iraq: A deadly waiting game.

Congratulations to Susan Taylor Martin and to Jamie Francis for their courageous, compassionate reports from Iraq. In haunting detail, this series conveyed the miseries faced by the 22-million people of this embargoed, brutalized land.

Sanctions have failed. Their continuance strengthens Saddam Hussein and dishonors our country, sending it down a course that is politically expedient, but obscenely cruel.

These policies can survive only in the dark, but these reports have shed a welcome light. The St. Petersburg Times should be proud of this work.
-- Drew Hamre, Golden Valley, Minn.

Do we need a guilt trip?

Re: Iraq: A deadly waiting game, June 4, 5 and 6.

So now we are supposed to feel guilty about the problems being endured because of Saddam Hussein's ignorance? What do you hope to accomplish by showing pictures of women and children suffering? And in a three-part series yet! Is this a guilt trip being pushed down our throats? Would the same coverage have been given to Hitler's Germany by the Times? I seriously doubt it!

So why put the American people on what appears to be a "shame on us" guilt trip? Why not provide coverage on the idiot who runs that country instead? Better still, give us some good news! Surely there are better things to cover than revisiting the desert world of Saddam Hussein!
-- R. Ghazarian, New Port Richey

Cuba and China are very different

The June 10 editorial Trade logic, which advocates ending the embargo against Cuba as the United States moves to normalize trade relations with China shows flawed logic. Unfortunately, the editorial misses the substantive differences between China and Cuba, taking a one-size fits all approach.

Clearly Cuba is in a class by itself. Fidel Castro has proven himself a repressive dictator uninterested in empowering anyone but himself. Castro has taken no meaningful steps whatsoever to improve the quality of life for the Cuban people or reform his dictatorial government-run economy. China, however, has eased back on state control and has begun taking steps to become an accepted member of the international trading community.

If a Florida corporation were to invest in China, it would do so with a joint venture partner. The American company would likely set the working conditions, health standards, hours and salaries of its Chinese employees. In short, it would help to develop an empowered middle class in China and move power away from the Chinese government.

However, if that same Florida company were to invest in Cuba, it would be forced to partner with the Cuban government. Fidel Castro, therefore, would set the working conditions, maintain health standards and set the wages, not the American company. This scenario means the Castro government would keep more than 90 percent of the wages paid for itself and pay the Cuban workers almost nothing. (Remember, equality in Cuba means everyone is poor.) The investment would empower the dictator and do nothing to empower the Cuban people.

This type of trade does not advance democracy; it forestalls the development of an empowered civil society. If our goal is to find ways to support the suffering Cuban people in their struggle for freedom, trading with the Castro government will not meet that goal. While both countries have a long way to go with respect to human rights, their track records on steps to economic reform are incomparable.

China's accession to the World Trade Organization is in the best interest of the United States. It will open the world's largest emerging market to U.S. goods and services. The United States must continue to vigilantly seek opportunities to export freedom and influence economic reform. Until we understand the clear distinctions between Cuba and China, we risk being misled by flawed logic.
-- Connie Mack, senator, Washington

Court moves health care the wrong way

Re: Suits over HMO incentives can't go to federal court, June 13.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that patients cannot sue health maintenance organizations in federal court for giving doctors financial bonuses to hold down treatment costs. Such financial incentives are how Congress intended for HMOs to work, the justices said in a unanimous ruling.

So, we are being told that Congress, in its wisdom, is not only allowing but in effect encouraging HMOs to give what is tantamount to a bribe so that they, the HMOs, can increase their profits? Is that what we are really hearing?

The current federal code specifies that if a hospital gives a doctor an incentive, financial or otherwise, even something as small as a preferred parking place, said hospital is guilty of violating federal Medicare and Medicaid regulations. The numbers of cases brought against hospitals for such activities have been significant. And yet now we are told that not only may HMOs take such action but that Congress intended for them to do so when the enabling legislation was passed.

To paraphrase a small newsboy outside a courtroom many years ago: "Say it ain't so, Mr. Chief Justice!"
-- Thomas I. Hayes Jr., D.Pharm, St. Petersburg

County should do the humane thing

Re: Trapped between two fences, June 13.

Although the photos of the injured deer trapped between two fences were extremely upsetting, I commend the Times for having the courage to print them. Pinellas County officials should act immediately to correct this entirely preventable cause of animal suffering before more animals are needlessly injured or killed.

Our county government has a dismal record with regard to animal welfare. For example, massive loss of wildlife habitat has resulted from decades of county-approved overdevelopment. And county policies contribute heavily to our cat and dog overpopulation problem, resulting in the killing of tens of thousands of homeless cats and dogs here each year. It would be a refreshing change if our county officials simply do what is humane and right this time.
-- Diana D. Ward, St. Petersburg

Fences bring needless suffering

Re: Trapped between two fences, by James Thorne, June 13.

This caused heartache and tears for the sake of those gentle deer who died in agony between two fences, one with barbed wire. Because of the apparent negligence of the county, heartlessness and apparent indifference of the owners of the property -- all in the name of love for money -- these animals are suffering needlessly.

The fact that the property owners are maintaining their ranch as a hunting preserve, a place where the deer can be used as targets, only adds to the greed and cruelty of the situation.

This is inexcusable!
-- Eva T. Carey, St. Petersburg

Newspaper only, please

I object to having my morning paper freighted with soap, cereal, chips and (on Friday) a CD. I imagine that most of this unrequested and unwelcome litter ends up in landfills -- contrary to the Times' generally ecological stance.

Please stop this waste or offer us the choice of a newspaper-only subscription -- at a lower price. Just the news, please!
-- Howard Carter, St. Petersburg

Share your opinions

Letters for publication should be addressed to Letters to the Editor, P.O. Box 1121, St. Petersburg, FL 33731. They can be sent by e-mail to letters@sptimes.com or by fax to (727) 893-8675.

They should be brief and must include the writer's name, address and phone number. Please include a handwritten signature when possible.

Letters may be edited for clarity, taste and length.

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.