Sir, - By and large, your coverage of events in the Balkans is to be commended. In particular, Lara Marlowe's searing reports are the stuff of courageous and responsible journalism.
However, I wonder why you choose to print the daily thoughts of Jonathan Eyal, director of studies at the Royal United Services Institute in London? Is it because you feel that these doses of NATO propaganda usefully complement your own ill-considered editorial stance on the desirability of Ireland's joining the "Partnership for Peace"?
As with that Orwellian phrase, Mr Eyal's NATO-speak is best understood by turning its terms upside down. Just as "peace means war", the claim in Mr Eyal's sermon for April 26th that "Slobodan Milosevic... has succeeded in providing most of the answers' to NATO's unanswered questions about its own purpose" should be rephrased to read: "Milosevic provided a useful pretext for NATO to overcome internal dissent on the eve of its Washington summit." Similarly, one must cast salt on Mr Eyal's pretence that "it is difficult to conceive of a NATO role in the Middle East ... because the positions of the Americans and the Europeans ... are so different." There are no differences so vast that a little bullying and a few massive arms contracts won't bridge them.
The reality was summed up by Noam Chomsky a couple of years ago: "NATO means the US. It's a cover for the US." Serbian and Kosovar civilians are paying the price for the venal acquiescence of European governments in US "leadership", another Orwellian word meaning total domination. - Yours, etc., Raymond Deane,
Haigh Terrace, Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.