A New China Threat?
As a Chinese graduate student and scientist, I take offense at your article on Chinese espionage (“Open Secret,” Asia, March 22). The United States is not brimming with spies sent by China in the guise of graduate students and scientists “as part of a nationwide technology-collection effort.” Most technological information is available to the public through scientific journals and on the Internet. The only nonpublic information would be that which is classified, belonging to government agencies that require security clearances. It is highly unlikely that Chinese nationals would be able to work at or even visit such facilities. So why would China recruit spies to report on public information? Are we now going to censor all published technological research and allow our scientific journals to be read only by U.S. citizens? The free exchange of ideas is paramount to the existence of the scientific community.
It seems to me that the United States is overreacting and is hypocritical in the so-called Chinese espionage scandal. There is no doubt that the United States has the most powerful and best organized intelligence service in the world. Apart from collecting military information, the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency are also effective industrial spies. But I really hope that the American politicians won’t launch another witch hunt against the Chinese in the United States.
A spy is a spy, regardless of his/her nation of origin, and a person is innocent until proven guilty. The accusation of the Taiwan-born scientist Wen Ho Lee by the media and U.S. officials just shows the hypocrisy of America.
The United States has tolerated years of ballooning trade deficits with China. The human-rights conditions in China continue to deteriorate as the government muzzles dissent and jails political opponents. And now there are reports that China even stole nuclear-miniaturization secrets from the United States in the late ’80s. China has achieved its long-term objectives–a strong economy and a menacing military–without having to worry about democracy, human rights and adherence to internationally binding treaties like the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, to which China is a signatory. What does America have to show for its efforts? Who has been driving whom?
As a Chinese graduate student at an American university, I read your article “Open Secret” carefully. Except for assumptions about the Taiwan-born scientist’s having stolen sensitive technology for China, I did not see any solid evidence mentioned in the article that can convince me it really happened. Is this what you are basing the initiation of an anti-China wave on?
Having read your articles on China, I was surprised to learn about the extent of anti-Chinese sentiment in America. In a modern multicultural society, there is no place for stereotyping and prejudice. At a time when we try to stamp out discrimination against blacks and Hispanics, the last thing we need is to start victimizing the ethnic Chinese. The Republicans are doing themselves a disservice by playing the racist card against the Chinese.
Looks like we haven’t learned anything from about 50 years of cold-war spy games with the U.S.S.R. China has simply taken the KGB’s place. For how long has all the top-secret information at the American lab in Los Alamos allegedly been slipping away? Is it true that no one knows the extent of the damage this information leakage has caused? I guess if Chinese missiles successfully land in Japan, or the Iraqi version hits Tel Aviv, we’ll know for sure.
A New Day in Germany
The resignation of German Finance Minister Oskar Lafontaine came unexpectedly on everybody in Germany (“Fresh Start,” Europe, March 22). This was, however, a right decision, because his financial work was neither popular nor successful. He simply messed up. I hope, on behalf of all of Germany, that our chancellor, Gerhard Schroder, will now bring us back on the right track again.
Tales of War
I have never read every word of an issue of NEWSWEEK the way I read your special commemorative issue on war (“Voices of the Century: The World at War,” March 15). I cried with practically every voice, saddened and yet inspired by each tale. I’m wondering now, though: if life is so precious, why do we choose to destroy it?
The preamble to the articles in your war issue, written by Kenneth Auchincloss and Michael Elliott, is one of the best articles I’ve ever read in a major magazine. It was an excellent overview of the key events of the 20th century. I truly enjoyed it.
From my high-school years in Canada I can recall we had to watch war films about Hitler and memorize the dates of the beginning and the end of World War II. That was about how far my knowledge about the war went, until I arrived in Poland and visited Auschwitz. What I saw and felt that day cannot be taught in any classroom. The day was hot and sunny, but I felt as if I were being followed by a dark cloud. Someone who was not there during the war will never realize the terror and the trauma its victims endured. The remnants of those horrid days were a rude awakening for me. And so were the memories of those who shared their stories in your “Voices of the Century.” I have never wept over a news magazine before. I commend all those who shared their experiences and those who, because of such tragedies, are unable to.
Congratulations on your March 15 war issue. History repeats itself–we go to war and then we talk about peace. When are we going to address the real problem and disarm? What happened to agreements to reduce nuclear arsenals such as START I and START II?
European Viewpoints
Thanks to Michael Elliott for his moderate and balanced comments on the Washington-European relations (“A Fight Between Friends,” news of the week, March 15). Most Europeans have their doubts about the self-regulating effect of a totally free market. The cheap bananas from Central America have for years contributed to U.S. living standards, but what about the striking misery of their producers? The aims and acts of EU governments reflect a different sociopolitical bias.
You write that the disagreement between Europe and America regarding the banana-growing countries of the Caribbean is a matter of Europe’s “colonial guilt.” Countries such as St. Lucia and Dominica are heavily dependent on banana sales, and it would be difficult for them to replace those essential earnings. Economic collapse could cause political instability. Also, if people are desperate they could turn to growing other crops. This should be of concern to the American authorities, who do not want to see an increase in illegal drugs finding their way into the country.
In an otherwise good article Michael Elliott dismisses the European position on Caribbean banana imports with “there’s no good reason that American fruit companies should pay a price for European colonial guilt.” While guilt may not be the highest motive for concern in this matter, it can, at least, have a positive relation to the word “good.” American apparent lack of concern for anything other than the returns of its shareholders has little. The last thing the Caribbean region needs is the further impoverishment of economies already under appalling pressure. In the long term that would do nobody, the United States included, any good.
You justify the acquittal of American Marine Corps pilot Richard J. Ashby on the ground that the gondola was not on his military maps. Since the gondola is actually on many ordinary road maps, I hope that those who were responsible for giving Ashby his maps also will be prosecuted.
As a European I was disappointed about the tone of this article, especially the ease with which you dismiss the outrage of Italy and other European countries about the acquittal of Richard J. Ashby. There was a minimum-altitude requirement of about 2,000 feet in this region. Ashby must have known this. The cable-ski gondola is at 370 feet. Ashby claims that his instruments were not working. But a pilot should be able to see the difference between 2,000 feet and 370 feet with the naked eye. If not, he should be taken from the flight roster immediately.
A Time to Read
Author John Grisham sells himself short when he says his books are not literature (“Grisham’s Gospel,” society <&> the arts, Feb. 15). While his novels may not be challenging to read, they certainly include literary themes–greed, vengeance, courage and honor. When I look aroundat the number of my high-school students who choose to read Grisham’s novels, I am thrilled. I know that most of them will not pick up a Faulkner or Hemingway novel once they are out of school, but I do want them to continue reading for pleasure. As an English teacher, that’s my long-term goal.
On Monday, March 29, my co-workers came to work from our mountains claiming to have heard bombs the night before in Yugoslavia. As they entered my office, I was in the process of reading NEWSWEEK’s “The World at War” issue. I was really confused. Here I was, reading horrifying firsthand accounts of war, while hearing about the war next door. It would be good to make everyone in the world stop for a moment and read these accounts. Maybe if history were taught through firsthand accounts like the ones found in your special issue, we might not be so inclined to repeat our grave mistakes. I want to thank NEWSWEEK and all the brave contributors to this issue.
Your issue on the world at war was very moving. However, I was disappointed, though not surprised, that you failed to mention the genocide of the Armenians in 1915, when the Turks massacred more than 1 million Armenians. Few people today know about this tragic event. The Armenian genocide got lost in the horrors and tragedies of World War I, and Turkey has never officially admitted its actions.
Your war issue was a powerfully illustrated essay of the men and women who have served their countries in so many capacities. But it was the photos that touched my soul and made me cry all over again for the human loss, my loss. As I stared at the pictures of the injured, dead, dying and crying, I felt as though I were intruding on their private hell. God bless all of them.
Americana Mania
In describing the global fascination with everything American, you omitted the most important cause (“Why We Care,” Society & the Arts, March 22). The massive production and commercial clout of U.S. television and films mean that the whole world is blitzed with Americana. Sometimes the dialogues are unintelligible, the references incomprehensible to non-Americans and the subject matters banal. Still, anyone who appears on TV mysteriously acquires star status. The deluge–from Monica to “Baywatch”–is influencing local attitudes and fashions, especially among the uneducated and impressionable young. Never mind that foreigners care–surely Americans should also be concerned?
A True Genius of Film
Thank you for Jack Kroll’s report on the legendary film director Stanley Kubrick’s life and films (“Kubrick’s View,” society <&> the arts, March 22). I would just like to point out that Kubrick’s movie “A Clockwork Orange” (1971) was not “pulled from British theaters because it inspired copycat crimes.” Kubrick withdrew it from public showing because he was fed up with British papers’ blaming it–and him–for every mugging that occurred after it was released. Kubrick stipulated that “A Clockwork Orange” remain unshown in Britain until his death. Nearly 30 years later, I am unconvinced we as a nation are ready for it. Britain still has the bad habit of blaming films and/or TV for its problems.
Stanley Kubrick, the last true genius of film, is gone. From now on we will be subjected to a mind-numbing, endless assault of overblown, overly loud “blockbusters,” assembled more with an eye toward market share and merchandising potential than real vision and creativity. Stanley, ever since “Dr. Strangelove,” I knew you were right. We’ll miss you.
