David Pratt’s enlightening, yet terrifying, assessment of the current situation in Iraq (“Benighted land where war is still a never-ending story”, The Herald, August 27) reinforces yet again his (and others’) claim that “we have been taken for mugs”.
Even more frightening are the revelations in John Pilger’s book, The Secret War in Iraq.
Since 1991, the United States and Britain have conspired a gulf slaughter in their pursuit of oil resources. The number of civilian casualties imputed has never been a priority statistic from either country. It has been estimated by reputable sources that one million is no exaggeration, of which two-thirds were children.
Since 2003, current civilian casualties have again been somewhat downplayed and the American/British PR machines geared into overdrive with yet more promising outcomes in what is now clearly an internal catastrophe for Iraqis.
Thanks to David Pratt and his on-the-scenes evidence, we should all now be aware that in any war the first casualty is truth. In his many criticisms of the Blair and Bush lies, damned lies and statistics, Chris Walker’s erudite letters in The Herald have been vindicated in the article by David Pratt. Since the Hutton Inquiry, then Butler and now the questions surrounding the death of Dr David Kelly, we have indeed been led a merry dance by some so-called honourable members and their entourage.
The saga continues with the almost muted Chilcot Inquiry and the sterilised hands of Cabinet participants now in denial of their support for Tony Blair and George Bush. Let there be no mistake: the Chilcot Inquiry, like its predecessors, will not assuage the determination to unearth the real truth about Iraq from good, honest men and women. Those in the opposite camp will require more than detergent to cleanse their bloodied hands.
George Paterson, Kemnay.
David Pratt’s forceful and surely accurate portrayal of Iraq today encapsulates what many feel is the true picture. The overall scene as the coalition prepares to withdraw and leave the Iraqis to their own murderous devices should cause everyone a deep sense of guilt and betrayal at leaving such a mess of our own making.
Apart from the non-existent WMDs, one of the weasel phrases used in politicians’ attempt to persuade the great general public that the war was legal and justified was to reassure the population that this war would reduce, if not eliminate, the terrorist threat on the streets of the UK.
In the same edition, one finds there is widespread radicalisation of Muslim inmates in UK prisons (“One in 10 Muslims ‘radicalised in jails’ ”). The article describes “hundreds of home-grown terrorists” and we that face “threats from lone bombers and assassins”. It goes on to say “perhaps some 800 potentially violent radicals, not previously guilty of terrorist charges” will be among us in five to 10 years. UK and US foreign policy “serves to focus alienation and resentment” and major events such as the London Olympics are likely targets.
These reports could well go into the box marked “we told you so”, if only politicians would pay heed to the views of the wider public before such events.
Nigel Dewar Gibb, Glasgow.
David Pratt writes movingly of his experience with Iraq. However, in reality there is little to prevent a coalition of states invading another sovereign state. Hypothetically, should there be a completely objective way to judge when help is given to a state that is failed or failing?
The United Nations has few powers to act, and can only approve or disapprove after an intervention.
So the US has led in this business, partly because it had the appetite and the means. Foreign Policy magazine feeds the public appetite there by publishing each year a “failed state” index. The index tells us that Somalia has been the number one failed state for three years running -- plagued by lawlessness and chaos, with pirates plying the coast while radical Islamist militias tightened their grip on the streets of Mogadishu.
The other nine in the top 10 are Chad, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Congo [5.4 million deaths since 1998, from UN estimates], Afghanistan, Iraq, Central African Republic, Guinea and Pakistan (nuclear).
Perhaps the European Union could at least present a united front in this minefield.
Ian Jenkins, Hamilton.
Tensions over water supply could be a trigger for the next war
We hear that water shortages arising from climate change may result in major wars. This is the kind of exaggerated alarmist claim that, without some convincing explanation, tends to discredit the climate change debate.
If I continue by stating that Pakistan, currently substantially and catastrophically inundated, is a case in point, many people will shake their heads sadly.
The Tibetan plateau contains the world’s third-largest store of ice. Qin Dahe, the former head of the China Meteorological Administration, said the recent fast pace of melting and warmer temperatures will be good for agriculture and tourism in the short term, but issued a strong warning: temperatures in China are rising four times faster than elsewhere, and the Tibetan glaciers are retreating at a higher speed than in any other part of the world. In the short term, this will cause lakes to expand and bring floods and mud flows. In the long run, the glaciers are vital lifelines of the Indus river. Once they vanish, water supplies in Pakistan will be in peril.
There are insufficient data to say what will happen to the Indus, according to David Grey, the World Bank’s senior water adviser in south Asia. But we all have fears that the flows of the Indus could be affected by glacier melt, and be reduced by perhaps as much as 50%. What does that mean to a population that lives in a desert where, without the river, there would be no life? We need to be concerned about that. Mr Grey refers to the situation that will arise when the glacial melt slows and adequate water in the Indus to meet agricultural irrigation needs will flow only in the monsoon season when, as we now see, it can flow in unwanted and massively destructive quantities.
The 3,180 kilometres (1,976 miles) Indus is a strategically vital resource for Pakistan’s economy and society. It provides the key water resources for the economy of Pakistan -- especially the breadbasket of the Punjab, which accounts for most of the nation’s agricultural production.
After the separation into independence of India and Pakistan in 1947, the use of the waters of the Indus and its five eastern tributaries became a major dispute between India and Pakistan. The concern over India building large dams on various Punjab rivers that could undercut the supply flowing to Pakistan, as well as the possibility that India could divert rivers in a time of war, caused political consternation in Pakistan. Holding diplomatic talks brokered by the World Bank, India and Pakistan signed the Indus Waters Treaty in 1960. Recently, Pakistani politicians, and alarmingly jihadist groups, have alleged that India is building dams in violation of the Indus Waters Treaty. They claim that these dams will reduce water flow from the eastern tributaries of the Indus that flow from India into Pakistan.
This has led to further strain on relations between the two countries. The British Dambusters film is not unknown in the Pakistani air force.
We have seen how suddenly war can break out over ownership of Kashmir. As climate change progresses, no-one can guarantee that disputes over scarce water will not result in a destructive war between these two Commonwealth neighbours, a war that can only compound poverty and suffering.
Michael Hamilton, Kelso.
Crucial questions about the validity and worth of wind farm-generated electricity
Catriona Stewart asks rhetorically if wind turbines “hum” but this is hardly the point at issue (“In praise of … Whitelee wind farm”, The Herald, August 28).
More important is: “Do they do anything useful?” Ofgem’s data for 2009-2010 shows that Whitelee had a load factor of 23% -- in other words, it produced less than one-quarter of its maximum capacity if the wind blew hard and continuously every day, year-round. This means that for many periods during the year the machines quite unpredictably generate less than their maximum output and often give next to no electricity.
The crucial questions and answers are:
Do they make much electricity? Obviously no. How much does it cost? At least twice as much as conventional wholesale electricity because the Renewables Obligation (RO) subsidy exceeds 100%. Who pays for this? We all do, as the RO subsidy is transferred unaccounted to all consumers’ bills. Would wind electricity be a marketable commodity without enforcement by the RO, which requires distributors to purchase a set percentage of renewably generated electricity? No -- the saleability of all other electricity demands total predictability on a half-hour basis. The noise issue is a quite separate matter and has nothing to do with “humming”. Ask those who have been driven from their homes and/or are unable to sell them.
Dr John Etherington, Pembrokeshire.
Catriona Stewart sings the praises of Whitelee wind farm (The Herald, August 28). She, like many of your readers, urgently needs to read Dr John Etherington’s The Wind Farm Scam. Like most commercial wind farms, Whitelee does not power any homes, it does not make any difference to climate change and it is driving the poor and the elderly deeper into fuel poverty. Is Ms Stewart aware that Whitelee is costing us, the consumer, £1m per week in subsidies and that, during the construction phase, millions of tons of precious peat were destroyed? Most of us who care about Scotland’s irreplaceable scenery wish this lady happy cycling and cannot wait until she gets back on her bike.
Bob Graham, Moray.
Countryside control is essential for diversity
What a breath of fresh air from John Whiteford (Letters, August 28). Up here in beautiful Aberdeenshire the spectacular wildlife is being threatened by do-gooders with little or no understanding of the management of the countryside.
Already we have noticed dwindling numbers of small birds and indigenous species followed with a marked explosion of grey squirrels, herring gulls, magpies, crows, buzzards and foxes. Proper management of the landscape has been wrested from local farmers and land managers with their innate ability to control harmful predation. They have been marginalised by a vociferous cabal with a misguided softness for many species.
Stupid protection laws have been enacted by pressure groups, trusting that Mother Nature herself will correct the imbalance. What tosh. Even academics in the community become incensed at the thought of reducing the number of predators with facile reasoning for their preservation. The loss of farm animals and their offspring, the destruction by foxes, feral cats, et al do not come into the equation.
Only this year the numbers of local birdlife has noticeably declined in my own garden. But there has been no such diminution of buzzards, cats, gulls, magpies, foxes, crows or grey squirrels. Ignorance is, indeed, bliss for those who know little of the real country life.
George Paterson, Kemnay.
Precautionary principle should be employed to protect workers in the semiconductor industry
I write in response to recent coverage of the HSE cancer investigation at National Semiconductor UK, Greenock (“No link to cancer at microchip factory, says HSE”, The Herald, August 25).
The Scottish Hazards Campaign joins the Phase II Campaign, the STUC, TUC, Unite, academics and others in calling for the precautionary principle to apply in determining working conditions in the semiconductor industry. The research found raised levels of cancers among staff. For example, 11 cases of colo-rectal cancer were found where 5.9 would have been expected. If small overall numbers mean a link between cancer and working conditions at the plant cannot be proven, that doesn’t mean a link does not exist. In another example, the report itself acknowledges that, for lung cancer, inability to gather information needed to explore findings means they “have not been able to say whether any of the known lung carcinogens or other substances in use at NSUK might or might not have contributed to the development of any of the cases”.
A previous HSE report showed the working environment in the sector as a whole is conducive to an increased cancer risk, as there is little “corporate oversight” on health issues and widespread law breaking. Action must be taken to protect workers from any exposure to suspected carcinogens.
Scottish Hazards shares others’ concerns that the limited nature of the study meant there was always a good chance it would not be conclusive. We would echo the call that a comprehensive study into cancer in the whole of the UK semiconductor industry be carried out.
It is crucial to remember that the issue of risk to health for workers at NSUK Greenock has been consistently advanced and highlighted through the internationally recognised work of the Phase II Campaign, a mainly women’s group in Greenock. It is crucial that this group be represented in discussions, events and meetings concerning this and future studies.
Kathy Jenkins, Secretary, Scottish Hazards Campaign Group, 113 Kingsknowe Road North, Edinburgh.
No room for makar
Touched by The Herald’s excellent coverage of Edwin Morgan’s life, I tried to buy one of his books as a gift for a friend. He may have secured his place as one of Scotland’s literary greats, but he doesn’t have a place in Waterstone’s shelves in Glasgow or East Kilbride. One assistant told me that they were running down the (paltry) poetry collection to make way for the Christmas bestsellers. Glasgow’s makar is presumably not a good commercial proposition compared to a biography of a so-called celebrity.
Lynn Bradley, Airdrie.
Caledonia was poor but NTS is excellent
John Craig suggests, on the basis of having seen the National Theatre of Scotland’s Caledonia, that the public funding of NTS should be transferred to Scottish Opera (Letters, August 27). Then Thom Cross asks how long NTS can “sustain any credibility (and budgets) on the basis of one brilliant production and an abattoir of lame ducks” (Letters, August 28). What is all this about?
I saw Caledonia and it was about as bad as professional theatre can get. Unlike Mr Craig, principally I blame the author and director, despite their distinguished track records, rather than the luckless actors.
What saddens me is that folk from outwith Scotland who have come to the Festival will go away with a very poor impression of the NTS.
However, this production was by far the worst thing I have seen NTS do -- everything else was in a different league and compares favourably with the vast majority of theatre in the UK, never mind Scotland.
I do not know whether these comments are based on very little knowledge of the work of NTS, a profoundly different perception of the quality of its work from mine or some hidden agenda.
I hope that those who agree with me that NTS as a concept, as a producing theatre and as an educational force deserves all the support it gets and will stand up and be counted.
Frank Bechhofer, Edinburgh.
