Sir, - After the latest wave of US-British air attacks on Iraq it is time that the role and operations of the tired old UN was reassessed in the light of the changing circumstances and needs. For those who have been totally mystified, as I am, by the purpose of these attacks, the only plausible answer must be that the US is the dominant member and the arbiter of our destinies at the Security Council table.
Apart from newspaper correspondence and some courageous spokesmen in the media, there has been little outrage expressed at this naked display of military might. Characteristically, the voice of the Celtic Tiger is muted when our own material interests are not threatened. One must ask what control does the UN exercise over the apparent unilateral action by London and Washington. The US, ever the master in self-advertisement for liberty and economic success, blatantly impresses the world, especially the Third World, with its greatness and power, reflecting the Western tendency to mould people of differing cultures and traditions to its own standards of democracy.
What most rational people would wish to see is the substitution of dialogue and diplomacy for missiles and in this respect the Secretary General, Mr Annan, has given a powerful example. What we have witnessed has been a disaster for peace and a rallying of support for Saddam. In a reformed and revitalised UN, no single member should be allowed to take offensive action at the whim of its leader or military advisers. Generally countries, no matter where, have their own ways of sorting out dictators and don't take too kindly to solutions imposed by a superpower. - Yours, etc., John F. Fallon,
Boyle, Roscommon.