Share this story
Close X
Switch to Desktop Site

US Has Not Ignored Violence in East Timor

As someone who visited East Timor in 1989 and was horrified at the repressive atmosphere there, I was pleased to see the Opinion page article "Throwing Light on Timor," Jan. 10, which focuses on American response to the Nov. 12 massacre at the Santa Cruz cemetery. However, the writer is apparently unaware of a number of facts.

While the situation has not received the notice it deserves, there has been much more media attention devoted to it than the article implies. The CBS Evening News, for example, devoted a segment to East Timor on Nov. 21 - a graphic report that helped spark bipartisan outrage and action in Congress. There have been multiple editorials and opinion articles in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and elsewhere, and other coverage of Indonesia's human rights abuses in East Timor.

About these ads

In addition, there has been considerable congressional activity beyond that of the excellent work of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Separate resolutions were passed by the House and Senate before Congress adjourned in late November. A letter by Sen. Malcolm Wallop (R) of Wyoming, signed by 52 United States senators on Nov. 25, called for the Bush administration to take a strong stand on human rights as well as for East Timor's right to self-determination.

Congress is now poised to take further action on this tragedy, which runs far deeper than the events of Nov. 12: The atmosphere of terror is reported to be worse now than at any time since Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975. Continuing public attention for these unfolding developments is urgently needed. The Rt. Rev. Paul Moore Jr., New York Concern for the people of Iraq

I have appreciated your paper's balanced coverage of the Persian Gulf war and its aftermath in Iraq, the Middle East, and repercussions in this country. But the editorial "Waiting Game in Iraq," Jan. 8, appears to support continuing the embargo in order to accomplish a doubtful political end.

What are the present objectives of the US and United Nations in Iraq - to destroy nuclear weapons, to demolish a war machine, to topple the present regime? Does an embargo, which is inflicting extreme hardship on a civilian populace (including severe malnutrition, crushing inflation, and even starvation), serve those ends? Is anyone dealing fairly with the Iraqi people? Mary M. Davis, Seattle Environmental action

In the article "New Legal Tools Needed to Preserve Earth," Jan. 2, the author states that "economists frighten us ... warning us of the cost of action, but rarely pausing to calculate the cost of inaction."

I am an American who has always been deeply opposed to having my tax dollars spent on nuclear arms that could destroy the ecosystem of our planet. I choose this greater evil over risking imprisonment for refusing to pay the taxes, but I think it's time we all pause to calculate the cost of our inaction to our mutual world environment. Pam Jenkins, Dangriga, Belize, Peace Corps volunteer

Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.