Letters: Apr. 6, 1981

Haig's Command

To the Editors:

Your interview with Secretary of State Alexander Haig [March 16] confirmed my faith in his ability to chart our course. His positions on human rights, relations with NATO, contact with China and Soviet adventurism are realistic and in the best interests of the U.S.

Joseph J. Salus

Hammond, Ind.

According to Haig, the threat of Communism is paramount to the threat of right-wing military dictatorships. Frankly, I see no difference between the two. Alexander Haig and his foreign policy beliefs are dangerous to the U.S. and, ultimately, to the world.

Richard M. Gureghian

Boston

Leonid Brezhnev has finally met his match. This country cannot survive as a free nation unless we project some determination to defend ourselves and our allies. Haig has this determination.

Barbara Bloom

Owings Mills, Md.

Secretary Haig should follow Teddy Roosevelt's advice: Speak softly and carry a big stick. Like most politicians, he talks too much and too stridently.

Irene Moore

Troy, N. Y.

You rib Alexander Haig for his Piltdown treatment of the English language. To those of us who share the general's khaki complexion, Haigledygook is the creative flowering of basic Army jargon.

The good officer and NCO know the value that the military (and the Government) sets on saying nothing well. Why grope for the single best word when the Army offers a bulging granary of verbal corn?

David Finnell

Captain, U.S.A.

Kaiserslautern, West Germany

Profit by Bribery

In discussing payoffs by businessmen in making foreign deals, "Big Profits in Big Bribery" [March 16], you failed to understand that it is extortion, not bribery that is the problem. Until all exporting countries agree not to submit to extortion, the practice will flourish. The 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act makes no more sense than would unilateral disarmament. The law does nothing more than penalize the U.S.

J. Richard Soars

Lewisburg, Pa.

You portray Western business concerns as honest but unfortunate victims of greedy villains of the Third World. Yet it is commonplace for American businessmen to spend billions of dollars annually converting good will and influence into profits. To accomplish this, great care is taken to retain the "properly positioned" law firms, the influential former military generals, prestigious interlocking corporate directors, graduates from the "right" business schools, effective political lobbyists, influential public relations companies, relatives of prominent people. And the U.S. Internal Revenue Service will accept the accompanying costs as legitimate business expense.

Consequently, it is surprising that you consider the employment of influential foreign nationals to be corruption. These people mostly work very hard and provide honest business information.

Khalid Abdullah Tariq Al-Mansour

San Francisco

Darwin in the Dock