Readers are invited to submit letters to The Guardian.
Letters may be e-mailed to guardian@cpa.org.au.
Letters of 300-400 words are preferred.

Letters to the Editor:

Real solutions

Israel and its supporters continually make statements that to 
stop Palestinian violence Israel must build a wall, that Arafat 
has to go into exile or that the Palestinian Authority has to 
repress and disarm the militants.

These are all Israeli distractions from the real crux of the 
problem. The only effective way to decrease Palestinian 
resistance and begin to resolve the Palestinian issues is for 
Israel to stop the occupation, withdraw from the Palestinian 
territories and stop building illegal settlements there.

The Palestinian violence is a reaction to the Israeli occupation 
and violence. Any other so-called solutions to the conflict that 
negates this central fact are just pathetic side issues and 
delays while suffering on both sides continues.

Of course the reality is that Israeli leadership and their US 
backers are not interested in a just solution of the conflict, 
but in an Israeli imposed deal that perpetuates Israeli control.

Steven Katsineris
Victoria

The proposal of US peace organisations for an international 
demonstration on October 25 with the demand for the withdrawal of 
all troops from Iraq deserves serious consideration irrespective 
of their alignment.

At this time it is the central demand of the peace movement and 
for us it is also focused on the withdrawal of Australian forces.

This demand comes at a crisis point for US imperialism with 
military defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan by guerrilla forces. The 
US government has the almost impossible task of getting troops 
from other countries to take over. Their economic crisis is 
deepening with a record government borrowing of US$47.4 trillion 
and a record budget deficit of US$455 billion. To this is added 
the cost of the Iraq war of at least US$6.15 billion.

The rising value of the Australian dollar to a five-year high of 
US69c is because of the sinking of the US dollar relative to the 
Euro and other currencies.

The opposition to the war is sharpening in Britain with 100,000 
marching and in US tens of thousands of wives of soldiers in Iraq 
harassing army bases demanding their men-folk be returned.

In Australia we must call for the return of our troops but also 
because of the cost — well over a billion dollars in money and 
an even bigger cost in trade in the Middle East.

The turning back of the sheep ship looks more and more like a 
political rather than a veterinary decision. There were no trucks 
ready to take them off and Egypt refused to transit them through 
the Suez Canal.

Of course, every opportunity must be taken to protest at the 
visit of President Bush under the slogan NOT WANTED in Australia. 
But it should not override or obscure the key demand of NOT 
WANTED in Iraq to be focused worldwide on October 25.

Vic Williams
WA

The US has George Bush, California has Schwarzenegger and 
Australia has Michael Jeffery. The new Governor-General is part 
of a trend for extreme right-wingers to end up in high office, by 
one means or another.

However, like his overseas counterparts, the new G-G is proving 
something of an embarrassment. He pipes up at the most unexpected 
times — at his own swearing in ceremony and when the reshuffled 
Howard ministry was being sworn in and his out-of-place 
commentary on the challenges facing Australia at the present 
time.

It's not just that he inflicts his "Christian" views on the 
public like some sort of tactless bull in a multicultural china 
shop, he is a militarist who commanded Australian troops in 
Vietnam.

Unlike General Cosgrove, he doesn't think that war was a mistake. 
Michael Jeffery is proud of his role in the war and holds to an 
unreconstructed cold warrior's interpretation of its history.

The Vietnamese were the aggressors in that conflict for resisting 
first the French and then the US occupation of their country. 
What is more unforgivable, the Vietnam beat both the French and 
the US colonialists. Consequently, the Vietnamese deserve every 
hardship they have endured as a consequence of that effort — 
according to the G-G.

We shouldn't be surprised, then, to read that the Queen's 
representative revealed to a recent Canberra gathering that he is 
a supporter of pre-emptive strikes against "repressive regimes". 
To cover his backside he wants the UN (in violation of its own 
charter) to do the dirty work in "potential or active trouble 
spots".

But he shot this cover story to pieces when he backed Robert 
Hill's push for an Aussie force that could operate globally 
alongside the US. He wants Australia's armed forces deployed 
throughout the South Pacific region. He sees them serving 
alongside a host of other Aussie personnel, like police, 
administrators and professionals. In fact, Michael Jeffery is 
more than just a militarist — he is a would-be colonialist. 
What's more, he's turning out to be a vocal one and lives in 
Government House.

I can recall some of Michael Jeffery's predecessors being 
chastised by the PM and his ilk when they took up political 
issues that came from the struggles of the Australian people. 
William Dean copped it regularly for allegedly straying beyond 
his duty to defend Aboriginal people from official attack.

This time around the Prime Minister appointed a person of his own 
ilk — a militarist, a conservative and someone who will say just 
exactly what Howard wants to hear.

Peter Hollingworth, another of Howard's personal choices, brought 
the standing of G-G down to a low level. Michael Jeffery is 
likely to take the decline even further with his ultra-
conservative views.

Bruce Gillman
Sydney