In your report on Kosovo, you say that the man behind all this is Slobodan Milosevic (“The Man Behind the Agony,” Special Report, April 19). But how do you justify the fact that the Serbs, after all the bombing in Yugoslavia, stand united and ready to sacrifice themselves and their children? Nobody would do that for a leader’s sake only. It goes deeper, to the very essence of protecting one’s country, history and heritage. NATO was formed for defense purposes, especially against the “communist threat.” What does that have to do with interfering in the internal problems of a sovereign country? Maria Chappas-Georgiadiou Larnaca, Cyprus
I was disappointed by the tone of the articles on Milosevic. You emphasize only the worst in his life. Although vice dominates Milosevic’s character (I don’t question this), this was an unfair portrayal. You used his son, Marko, as an example of the family’s possessive nature. But why has nothing been said about his daughter? Wasn’t there anything about her that would have helped in portraying Milosevic? Joanna Dubiec Warsaw, Poland
If NATO doesn’t take Milosevic out of the volatile Balkan equation now, he’ll be around for a long time, threatening world peace, just as Saddam Hussein still does. NATO should set a precedent for the next century by insisting that Milosevic and his top cronies be handed over for war crimes. Tony Pupkewitz Windhoek, Namibia
When I read your articles about Slobodan Milosevic’s mind and motives, he reminded me of Leopoldo Galtieri, head of the military junta in Argentina in 1982. Galtieri’s grip on power was quickly slipping away as the Argentines were increasingly questioning his human-rights abuses. To stay in power, he played a dangerous game by invading the Falkland Islands. This rallied the people behind him–but only for a while. The result was a complete setback for Argentina. In a matter of days after the defeat, Galtieri was out of power. This could happen to Milosevic, too, on the condition that NATO wins the war. Irawan Sumardi Jakarta, Indonesia
The Albanian Kosovars used to have a self-rule that other European minorities can only dream of. But it cannot have satisfied them, since all they wanted was to break away from Yugoslavia. Can Northern Ireland break away from Britain? If the answer is yes, then there’s no reason that Kosovars should not do the same in Yugoslavia. But if the answer is no, the NATO members’ double standards should be abandoned immediately. Sasa Jorgic Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
In your interview with German foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, he said that his generation of baby boomers asked their parents, “Why could [the Holocaust] happen in Germany–and why didn’t you resist?” (" ‘We Have to Win This’ “). I believe that because such questions have continually been brought up by many Germans since 1945, we today see a different Germany–as a member of the NATO force fighting for humanity in Kosovo. Japan has also been on the side of great evil in the past. Compared with Germany, however, Japan has shown little repentance. Asians are worried because of concealment of war crimes to this day. I hope that Japan can grow further as a mature nation by learning from Germany’s transcendence of its grim past. Rhee Jong-Won Seoul, South Korea
Waging War for Harmony? In your article “The Good Soldier,” it sounds as if Vice President Al Gore wants to establish “diversity and harmony” as vital national-security interests (Special Report, April 19). Given the Clinton administration’s recent propensity for moral relativism, its newfound righteousness is hypocritical. Anyone who thinks that we should wage war to enforce diversity and harmony shouldn’t be commander in chief. Craig L. Scanlan Rumson, New Jersey
Understanding Hatred
Congratulations to Rod Nordland for his true observations and deep understanding of Serbian nationalism (“Vengeance of a Victim Race,” Special Report, April 12). Nordland correctly points out that “the Serbs are Europe’s outsiders, seasoned haters raised on self-pity.” If this hatred had been understood just a few years ago, it might have saved tens of thousands of victims in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. Democracy and peace cannot be established in the Balkans simply by bringing the Kosovo refugees home, regardless of the presence of U.N. or NATO security forces. We need to restructure the Serbian education system–teach the young Serbs the values of democracy, equality and tolerance. Turgay M. Ergene Balearic Islands, Spain
What Nordland calls “the Serb-as-victim myth” was reality about 55 years ago. Then the Croatian fascist movement Ustashe massacred hundreds of thousands of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies and Muslims, with technical assistance from the Germans and, often, the enthusiastic support of the Roman Catholic clergy. According to G. Reitlinger’s book “The Final Solution,” this isn’t a myth invented in the 1990s by Serbian propagandists. Serbian violence, however undesirable, is the result of a paranoia provoked by memories of violence against the Serbs. Nordland is entitled to his opinions, but it’s sad that you should choose to publish an article that seems to provoke further hatred. Sara Lewis Brussels, Belgium
Defining Genocide While I agree with Elie Wiesel about the situation in Kosovo in general, I must protest against his opinion that this doesn’t constitute genocide (“The Question of Genocide,” World View, April 12). During WWII it was done with the same clinical efficiency by the Germans. Entire villages were emptied, and people were herded off to camps from which they would never be heard again. “Ethnic cleansing” is just a politically correct term for genocide. If the Kosovars return to their villages, they will be killed because they’re not the “right” ethnicity–just as we saw in WWII. Mary Hilton Norway, Maine
In the face of colossal human tragedy, Nobel laureate Wiesel makes it look less horrible than the Holocaust. Wiesel, being the ambassador of peace, should have come up with a more humanistic approach to Kosovo instead of this plain scholarly analysis. Muhammad Uzair Bhaur Lahore, Pakistan
From Bonn to Berlin
The German policy is changing. This has nothing to do with the relocation of the government from Bonn to Berlin, but with the result of last year’s election for the federal Parliament, the Bundestag (“City on the Edge,” Back to Berlin, April 19). Thus I do not understand how the “Berlin Republic” can have a specific Berlin policy. The relocation is just an act of normalization after the German reunification: a country’s government has to be in its capital. And in this function Berlin has a long tradition. It was the capital of the former German Democratic Republic, whose socialist party ruled from Berlin. Berlin’s being the capital is therefore nothing new to the about 17 million who lived in the former East Germany. Johannes Karl Theodor Kessner Dehra Dun, India
“Back to Berlin” does not mean goodbye to Bonn. The Germans are still a crowd of vacillators. Because they’re not able to decide, the German government will stay divided–partly staying in Bonn and partly in Berlin–as it was before 1989. This isn’t necessarily the vision of a capital. But it may be the expression of a special kind of German federalism between Europe’s future and Germany’s awareness of history. Christoph Heise Herne, Germany
Tibet’s Struggle for Freedom I’d like to thank you for your informative article on Tibet (“China’s Balkan Crisis,” Asia, April 19). Articles like this, being both enjoyable and enlightening, are good sources regarding the history, culture and agonies of nations that people around the world may not hear about too often. Hanadi Badrieh Amman, Jordan
NEWSWEEK, your report on Tibet effectively encapsulated the decades of pain and frustration of a people. Tibet is probably the world’s last colony, plundered and decimated by a tyrannical Chinese leadership. Unlike Kosovo, Tibet and its people were an independent and proud nation before the Chinese colonization. The world has chosen to ignore Tibet to appease and do business with China. The parallels with Kosovo include stories of repression, but more important, systematic ethnic cleansing. Millions of Tibetans have been driven out of their country. This is a ploy to assert Chinese majority in Tibet in the future when, or if, Tibet becomes independent. The world owes Tibet its independence. If not, it risks having the decimation of a brave people on its conscience. Naveen Rolands Bangalore, India
Congratulations on your Tibet story. I enjoyed reading it. It’s important that the world knows what China did, and is still doing, in Tibet. Nobody can approve of tyranny. The world leaders must get together to oblige China to free Tibet and authorize His Holiness the Dalai Lama to return to Lhasa–where he can assume his genuine right to be Tibet’s political leader. Monica Maria dos Santos Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Your article on the CIA involvement in Tibet will help to break the stereotype of the (under all circumstances) peace-loving Tibetan. My father was in Colorado’s Camp Hale in the 1960s and parachuted into Tibet. He and his fellow Tibetan guerrillas endured hardships in attempting to throw off the yoke of communist tyranny. There are thousands of unsung heroes who stood up to the might of the world’s largest army for two decades. The Tibetan image of a peace-loving people, however laudable, should not make us fail to acknowledge these martyrs. Cheme Dorjee Katmandu, Nepal
To shed more light on the historic background and ongoing troubles in Tibet is laudable. But the article would have been even more complete had it also mentioned that Tibet has one of the earth’s richest deposits of uranium; China tests its nuclear weapons in Tibet and produces and stores hazardous nuclear waste there. These factors explain the Chinese interest in Tibet. Bhagawati E. Morriss Denpasar, Indonesia
It’s unfair to China’s present leadership to compare their policy and deeds in Tibet with what Milosevic is doing in Kosovo. Yes, the history books about the Chinese Communist Party are full of the blood of opposition factions, of undesirable social elements and of dissidents–but never that of ethnic groups. The CCP has not treated Tibetan counterrevolutionary enemies any worse than their own Han counterparts in China. Apart from the geopolitical reason China has for an absolute control over Tibet, the CCP did have a higher moral mission in liberating common Tibetan serfs from the absolute rule of the Tibetan aristocrats and monasteries. Jason M. Stone Nonthaburi, Thailand
What’s the difference between China’s Zhu Rongji, Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic? I know that Zhu is a “strategic partner,” while the other two are mortal enemies, but I still fail to see the difference. Rene Gardea Prague, Czech Republic
A Controversial Custom
Sacrificing children should grieve us all. Instead, your article “Children of the Ice,” on the 500-year-old mummies of sacrificed children found in Argentina, seems bent on desensitizing us to the horror of it. Mario Lazarovich, director of cultural heritage in the province of Salta, seems to invite the readers to accept such practices by saying that “they [the mummies] exude an air of tranquillity… this was not a time of terror and horror but of peace and worship.” The author even suggests that sacrificing the children shows that “they were precious to their people.” Have we become so politically correct, so indoctrinated in cultural relativism, that we can’t even recognize a tragic practice in an ancient culture? Heidi Coombs Cajamarca, Peru
I read your article “Children of the Ice,” about how “precious” Inca children were to their people. So precious, in fact, that those children were drugged and left to freeze to death as human sacrifices to an ancient god, all in “peace and worship.” Excuse me? Are you actually romanticizing the torture and murder of young children? Make no mistake: the two-day trip toward their inevitable deaths would surely have been a horrific form of torture for those children. No matter that they met a nonviolent demise, complete with plenty of hallucinogens and corn liquor. Sacrificing children in hopes of gaining good crops and political benefits does not speak to me of a loving culture that treasured its children, but of adults willing to prey on the weakest faction of society for their own personal gain. Magi Smith Glenoma, Washington
I am a Native American, and I was saddened to see the photo of one of the preserved mummies accompanying your story. To seek and then dig up these mummies is sacrilegious. It shows lack of respect for the religion of the people who put them there, and for the reason they were put there. The real purpose of the sacrifice is lost in time. I can’t help wondering if, 500 years from now, scientists will do the same thing to the children buried generations ago in the nearby rocks of our sacred Hopi burial ground. (These children, of course, were not part of a sacrificial ritual, but had died young of natural causes or trauma.) Return the children buried by the Incas. Let them serve out the purpose for which they were put there. It may have been for the good of all mankind. Respect the beliefs of an ancient people as you would want your own beliefs respected today. Sharon Batala Kykotsmovi, Arizona
