Sir, - When the Indonesian dictator Suharto sent his forces to invade East Timor in 1975, the then US ambassador to the UN Daniel Patrick Moynihan (of whose ethnic roots some Irish people are misguidedly proud) boasted that "the United States wished things to turn out as they did and worked to bring this about." A few weeks after the event, he noted approvingly that "10 per cent of the population [had been killed], almost the proportion of casualties experienced by the Soviet Union during the second World War".
Now that the promised referendum that could lead to East Timor's independence (although its continued occupation by Indonesia has always been and remains illegal!) has been postponed for the second time, anti-independence militias have reportedly displaced "up to 100,000 people .. . making it impossible to register them for voting" (The Irish Times, July 10th). What is the attitude of NATO, still congratulating itself on its defeat of Milosevic (who remains in power)? ".. . There no hint that Washington is about to apply the muscle of sanctions to press for a fair voting atmosphere or to back sending armed UN peacekeepers, like Kfor in Kosovo. Indonesia's rejection of this has been respected."
Of course, the Kosovans are white Europeans, Yugoslavia was an easy target, and Indonesia is a powerful ally, armed by the UK, and therefore must be "respected", however bloodstained its record. But please, could those who supported NATO's recent actions desist from mouthing sanctimonious fatuities about "ethics" and "humanitarianism"? Expediency brought about the destruction of Yugoslavia and expediency is consigning the long-suffering East Timorese to their fate. - Yours, etc., Raymond Deane,
Dun Laoghaire, Co Dublin.