BURYING THE PAST

"I applaud Ireland's vote for progress. Let us write its troubles into the history books and look to a peaceful future."
SYLVIA ALFORD
Windhoek, Namibia

Peace in Northern Ireland [June 1]? I'll believe it when I see it. Of course a majority voted for the plan of action for peace in Ireland; a majority would always vote for peace, even 10 or 20 years ago. The trouble is that a tiny minority bent on violence can inflame an entire population with fear and suspicion. Gerry Adams, president of Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Irish Republican Army, may have changed his tune, but others have not. Ask me 30 years from now whether this was a watershed or just another "Sinn Feint."
FLASH FIASCO
Mannheim, Germany Once more British prime minister Tony Blair must be hailed for his political savvy and foresight. The agreement he helped shape between the two warring communities in Northern Ireland was a feat undreamed of only months ago. Though the agreement has been okayed by a majority of people in both Irelands, it's still difficult to figure out what lies ahead for that troubled land. No doubt each side will have to part with some of its demands for the common good. But will the two communities ever have a common notion of exactly what the common good is?
FRANCOIS VANNEREAU
Tours, France You published wonderful articles about Ireland and the whole "yes" campaign. I am emotionally involved in all things connected with Northern Ireland and the peace process, and your report was a source of useful information about the difficulties of Ireland.
TOMASZ RENKIEL
Gliwice, Poland The vote in Northern Ireland was for the acceptance of a written agreement outlining a future structure for the governance of that country. The referendum in the Republic of Ireland was on a different subject, namely whether Sections 2 and 3 of the Irish constitution should be amended to exclude any claim to the whole island of Ireland and its people. The point must be made that the Irish people were not asked to vote on the written agreement, and the people in the North had no chance to vote on any amendment to the Irish constitution.
PETER MULLIGAN
Northampton, England

HABIBIE TAKES CHARGE

Too much has been written about Suharto. Enough is enough [June 1]. Pol Pot is dead and resting in peace, so why not let Suharto live in peace with his family and enjoy the last part of his life as a private citizen? President B.J. Habibie should go on with his work but remember that the path to economic recovery is bumpy. It will take hard work, sincerity, resilience and the fulfillment of promises made to the Indonesian people.
KAMARULZAMAN ZAINAL
Kuala Lumpur There are no demonstrations here in Indonesia now, and life is back to normal after Vice President Habibie's takeover from President Suharto. The only thing that is worrisome to us is the uncertainty about the future of our country. There are so many rumors flying around, mostly political gossip, about when new elections may be held. But we learn from history. This situation is exactly like the one in 1968, when Suharto deposed Sukarno because Sukarno's extravagant spending had damaged the economy.
SAHABBUDIN NUR
Uujungpandang, Indonesia Habibie's loyalty to Suharto, extreme or otherwise, is common for a politician. There is nothing extraordinary about it, considering that Habibie has known Suharto since the new President was 13! But Habibie is loyal to Indonesia. No one else is better qualified to lead. It is still not possible, however, to resolve the country's economic problems quickly. As for the real and sensible changes alluded to, I am certain that the International Monetary Fund package is not meant to bail out Indonesia. On the contrary, its aim is to help foreign banks that have taken business risks in Indonesia and lost badly. Could everybody just stop interfering and let the Indonesians themselves decide what's good for the nation? They don't need more chaos.
HUSSIN NAYAN
Sarajevo

NUKES OR A STRONG ECONOMY?

Logically, developing countries like India and Pakistan, teeming with hungry, illiterate millions, should not waste their financial resources building up nuclear arsenals [June 1]. It is a strong economy--not a few nuclear explosions--that will earn a nation prestige in the world community. But politicians, whether Indian, Pakistani or American, rarely act logically.
NANDINI DUTTA
New Delhi I come from nuclear-free New Zealand, but I find the latest round of criticism against the tests in India to be hypocritical. The U.S. and Russia combined have more than 34,000 warheads and have performed more than 1,700 nuclear tests. Yet they condemn a country that has a mere 65 nuclear warheads. This debate has little to do with nonproliferation and much to do with the perceived threat to international powers.
ROSS HOOKER
Neuenburg, Germany The national security of Pakistan and its need to perform nuclear tests outweighed American incentives not to carry them out. The U.S. should put itself in Pakistan's shoes and visualize what it would have done if Russia had set off tests as India did. I am sure America would have reacted in the same way that Pakistan did.
MOHAMMAD FAHIM
Karachi America was prompt enough in exercising sanctions against India and Pakistan for going nuclear. Will the same sanctions apply to Israel if it decides to detonate an atomic device? Or will America come up with an excuse and follow the policy of double standards?
FARHAN AHMED
Karachi For the past 50 years, we have heard what a great friend and ally Pakistan is to the U.S. But when the U.S., on the basis of this friendship, requested that Pakistan not carry out nuclear tests, what did Pakistan do? It humiliated America in front of the whole world and went right ahead with its nukes. This proves that Pakistan is certainly no friend to the U.S. and no ally.
BHARATI SINHA ROY
Mumbai, India Now that both India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, the U.N. should enforce mandates that will prevent a nuclear confrontation between these two irrationally aggressive neighbors. Sanctions will not work--indeed, the two countries had already weighed this consequence before recklessly pressing ahead with their nuclear preparations. What is needed to bring India and Pakistan to their senses is the threat of a multinational action that could end in a pre-emptive military strike against their nuclear-bomb making facilities. That would save us all from having nuclear war erupt over the Kashmir issue or some other jingoistic dispute. Fortunately, the threat of force made Iraq's Saddam Hussein back down. Is the real possibility of an India-Pakistan nuclear war any less a threat to world peace?
PAUL BEAUMONT
Bangkok

DON'T COLONIZE AFRICA AGAIN

In his letter to TIME, David Hawkins suggested leasing a country in Africa to a Western nation or corporation for 99 years so that the lessee could improve it [May 25]. "Leasing" a country is just another word for colonizing it. The British in India, the French in Indochina and most European nations in Africa thought they were being nice by "civilizing" the locals. All they did was exploit those countries. The only solution to improving Africa's underdeveloped states is leadership. The citizens of these nations aren't stupid, though they may be illiterate. What they need is a good leader and a shot at better education so they will be able to vote for the proper candidate to help their country succeed.
KARIM EL SHAKANKIRI
Nantes, France African nations cannot catch up by leasing themselves to Western nations or multinational corporations. Africa can improve economically only by reviving indigenous technology that was lost, and by making improvements to this base. African nations need to tackle issues of technological and economic self-reliance, and their people need to select leaders who can spearhead these areas. Such earnest self-reliance will enhance the continent in the eyes of the world.
PATRICE KWAME OWIAFE
Winnipeg, Canada

THE PRESS AND CANCER

Through an editing error, the letter below was printed in an abbreviated form [June 8]. To precisely convey the writer's viewpoint, we are publishing the original letter in full. Although I work for the New York Times, I'm writing you as a cancer patient undergoing treatment. You maligned science reporter Gina Kolata's Times article on new cancer drugs for creating "false hopes" in patients most in need of a breakthrough [May 18]. Not only does your own follow-up reporting belie that charge (clearly there is sufficient new hope to call for a TIME cover story), but if you interview enough cancer patients, you'll find that hope is its own drug, false or not. Are you implying that cancer patients would rather not know about such progress and live in a world where doctors can disclose promising research on their own timetable? Those days are over, thank God, and the reaction to Ms. Kolata's article proves it. I would assume that the response--what you call hype--will pressure drug companies and researchers to compete, get faster results from the FDA and encourage funding. It seems the false hopes that were most dashed were those of TIME's journalists who didn't get the story first.
AMY M. SPINDLER
New York City

MALAWI'S FRIENDLY PEOPLE

I was saddened to read your Traveler's Advisory on the museum that has opened in the Mikuyu Prison, outside Blantyre, Malawi [June 1]. Focusing on the prison and the political situation that it sprang from overlooks the real attributes of Malawi. The people are probably the friendliest in the world, though they have almost nothing. Constant criticism in the international press hurts the people the most.
OLIVER REPRICH
Bryanston, South Africa

LOOK WHO'S TALKING TOO!

A number of readers identified with Lance Morrow's musings about chatting with yourself [June 1], with several recalling their own self-discussions. Roberto Llamas of Pinecrest, Fla., admitted that he often has dialogues with his alter ego in two tongues. Explained Llamas: "I alternate between English and Spanish and follow a question-and-answer format. Since gestures are a part of my 'bililoquy,' I get strange looks." Polly Rerko of St. Charles, Ill.,was recently jolted back to reality when her two-year-old son chirped "Mommy, who are you talking to all by yourself?" And a sigh of relief was heard from Carol Ann Rowley of Millersville, Pa., who said, "Thanks! You've put me in the company of Shakespeare and Jefferson. I will never question my sanity again!"