Natalie Nougayrède, in her assertion that we have no alternative but to rely on “US leadership if a rules-based global order is to survive” (America must lead the free world – the alternative is chaos, 28 January), betrays an outdated cold war world mentality that excuses US barbarity in the name of some fictional “free world”.
In his defence of that “free world”, Barack Obama killed and maimed people on an epic scale. A Council on Foreign Relations survey reported that in 2016, the US military dropped 26,171 bombs on some of the poorest nations on earth. Drone strikes were responsible for killing over 4,500 people, many of them women and children attending family gatherings or merely going about their business. Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq and Pakistan were all subject to American aggression.
In Libya, Nato forces led by Obama and Hillary Clinton struck on 9,700 occasions, after which the Red Cross identified mass graves containing the bodies of children killed by air raids on civilian targets. Of course, there is nothing new about any of this: in its role as the world’s self-appointed policeman, the US has been invading countries and overthrowing governments for decades.
The peace and security of the west and, indeed, the world at large, will be secured by dialogue, cooperation and mutual assistance, not by simplistic propaganda that should have disappeared after the fall of the Berlin Wall.
Bert Schouwenburg
International officer, GMB union
• Natalie Nougayrède is wrong. There is always an alternative, but we need to discuss our options widely. Tina (there is no alternative) suits narrow, binary thinkers, who close down debate before it can start. The military-industrial complex has always needed an enemy to justify its existence, and Donald Trump will always be on the side of businessmen. Now he’s friends with Vladimir Putin, he won’t stand up for Ukraine or the Baltic states. Nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers won’t defeat Isis, so Iran is the main option to be the next military threat. As the article says, Europe thinks there is the possibility of a negotiated settlement. Trump sees threats and bullying as the only solution. Maybe we should redefine Tina: Thinking (or talking) is the new alternative.
Michael Peel
Axbridge, Somerset
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
