Worried by those who think diplomacy is the only answer

Credit:Illustration: Matt Golding

To submit a letter to The Age, email [email protected]. Please include your home address and telephone number. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.

Diplomacy is better, yet…

It worries me to disagree with those – including your correspondents – who think war can be avoided by diplomacy. It also worries me that some see global warming as more important than making sure we can defend ourselves should another country want to invade us. It worries me because they are right to think that diplomacy is better than war and they are right to think that global warming will kill many more than any particular war.

Yet human nature being what it is, some rulers with territorial ambitions are not amenable to diplomatic overtures any more than career criminals in our own community. Otherwise why do we have a police force? We take it for granted that, should it be necessary, our lives and our property will be protected by police who are expected to put their lives on the line to protect us. I suspect that, similarly, most of us would expect to be defended if we were attacked by another country. I doubt that simply learning to say in Mandarin “I surrender” is the answer, as the British philosopher A.C. Grayling suggested, possibly tongue-in-cheek.
Claude Miller, Castlemaine

Balancing war and peace
David Livingston (“We may never fight China”, 11/3) brought a welcome sense of balance into the discussion about the chances of war with China. It seems like the Taiwanese have a more sanguine view of the Chinese threat than people here. Critical to the Ukraine situation has been their leadership and the willingness of their people to stand up and fight against their overbearing neighbour. There was a similar situation in Finland in 1939, 1944 and again afterwards. The Finns fought hard against Stalin even though they were vastly outnumbered. But after the war they realised they needed to make sure the Soviet Union did not feel threatened and that Finland would fulfil numerous demands. This realistic policy enabled Finland to keep its independence. As it turned out it also created opportunities for Finland to radically modernise its economy.

Australia can learn, and I am gratified by the remarks of our prime minister that we strengthen ourselves militarily but even more importantly we develop our relationship with China, and others.
David Scott, Eltham

Peace negotiations
Some of your letter-writing peace negotiators need reminding that England negotiated for peace with Hitler right up until the bombs started falling. Then they went to war.
Murray Horne, Cressy

Sub contract
Why are we sending 1000 workers to the US to be trained to build nuclear subs? Everyone knows it’s un-Australian to read instructions.
Paul Custance, Highett

Priorities
The AUKUS submarine quote, surely a lowball figure, is $100 billion. This will guarantee, not immunity from attack by China, but that we will be a priority target.
Tony Haydon, Springvale

Who pays?
How about a 10 per cent tax on mining company profits to fund the nuclear subs. After all, it is they who aided the opposing force.
John McIntyre, East Brighton

Unhelpful distraction
A family member was summoned to perform jury duty last year and was astonished at the court’s fastidiousness in ensuring those accused received a fair trial. She initially worried about her capacity to absorb, understand and assess the complex information upon which the fate of the accused would rest. Justice is a serious matter.

I put it to your correspondent (Letters, 11/3) that were you the accused, with your fate hanging in the balance, you would not appreciate any distractions whatsoever from the public gallery, including the odd cry from a hungry baby.
Ronald Elliott, Sandringham

Portraying Camilla
Was it necessary to portray the confronting close-up of Camilla on the “Good Weekend” cover? Is this a way to pander to her detractors?
Susie Holt, South Yarra

Creative solution
At last a progressive idea focused on the welfare of moderate offenders (“Call to swap jail time with retail work”, 10/3). As a former youth worker and honorary probation officer it was more than dispiriting when normal and caring young offenders were incarcerated for non-violent and/or relatively minor offences. Certainly their period of detention with exposure to hardened inmates was rarely helpful in enhancing their rehabilitation chances. Accordingly the rate of recidivism was high.

Much higher one suspects than under a scheme as proposed by the Institute of Public Affairs for non-violent and low-risk offenders. Detention reform is long overdue and the Institute’s creative proposal is worthy of support.
Brian Marshall, Ashburton

Wrong way
How could DRIVE award car of the year to a massive polluting fossil-fuelled pick-up truck? Pick-ups and large SUVs are the most emissions intensive passenger vehicles in Australia. Promoting these as urban family cars is irresponsible and out of touch.
Guy Abrahams, Richmond

Eye-watering spend
People are paying $US353,000 for a handbag? (“What the world’s ultra-rich are buying”, 11/3). How many people would that feed, or how many school supplies for disadvantaged children could that buy? But I guess people with that much money have no idea about hardship.
Marie Nash, Balwyn

Patrick Elligett sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.

Most Viewed in National

From our partners

Source: Read Full Article