Insecure Nations Will Want Nukes
I was amazed by the Opinion page article ``How to Prevent Spread of Nuclear Weapons,'' Sept. 21. Most nations expanding their military to the nuclear alternative do so partly for internal prestige but largely because of a perceived external threat.
Does the author really believe that Ukraine, surrounded as it is with instability and potential hostility, or any other nation for that matter, will give up its nuclear option in exchange for US reassurances ``that we will do more for them than any indigenous bomb or missile program could provide''? After watching what happens to helpless nations like Bosnia, this article seems naive. Jeff Siddiqui, Lynnwood, Pa. Balkan puzzle in disarray
Regarding the article ``Mostar: A Warsaw Ghetto in Bosnia,'' Sept 14: As a condition to signing the Geneva accord, Bosnian President Alija Iztegebovic has asked for the coastal city of Neum as an outlet to the sea. The Bosnian commander quoted by the author agrees. While the desire for a port is understandable, geographically and ethnically this makes little sense.
Neum is not a minor adjustment. This condition is an attempt to break the negotiations and draw Western military intervention. The Neum stretch is ethnically over 90 percent Croatian and would cut Croatia in two. An unfriendly force in Neum makes defense of Dubrovnik and southern Dalmatia impossible. Should the entire population of Neum be ethnically cleansed? Anne Parks, Durham, N.C. Turkey and NATO
There is a factual error in the otherwise excellent Cover Story, ``Old Clash of Empires Still Echoes,'' Sept. 13. The time gives the wrong year for Turkey's joining NATO. The actual date was Feb. 18, 1952. Daniel O. Newberry, Bethesda, Md.