American leadership not always beneficial
Editor of the Reformer:
Your guest editorial from the Washington Post ("World needs leadership from America", May 24) cannot go unanswered. It is misleading and out of touch with reality. The WP speaks of a successful "liberal international order of the past seven decades" that is supposedly being eroded because of an alleged "American retrenchment." And the WP sees the "morass" in the Middle East as partly "the consequence of (an American) leadership vacuum." That last sentence is astounding. The morass is the direct consequence of President Bush's aggressive war against Iraq that also gave rise to the terrorist organization "Islamic State" that we all dread now. That was certainly not an "American retrenchment.
" And a lot of people and nations around the world would not share the view that "American leadership" in the last seven decades has always been so beneficial. Think of the Vietnam war. Think of President Reagan's bloody attempt to remove the leftist government of Nicaragua. Think of the many other elected governments that were overthrown by the CIA or the American military (e.g. Iran, Guatemala). Think of the many brutal dictatorships around the world that the United States has supported and still supports. Think of the torture that the CIA committed. Think of the drone war Washington is conducting in many parts of the world, breaking international law and killing many thousands of innocent civilians. That is not "beneficial American leadership" and certainly not a sign of "American retrenchment." I don't know which world the WP is looking at, but it is certainly not the one we live in.
Reto Pieth Grafton, May 27