LETTER: Confused Nato analysis

There is one important fact your regular columnist Ismail Lagardien overlooks in his confused analysis of Nato (“Look beyond Trump’s shaming of Zelensky and things don’t get any clearer”, March 5).

The countries he lists as examples of Nato and America’s evil history — Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan — are textbook examples of grossly undemocratic countries where the imposition of sharia oppresses most of their citizens, especially women.

That is a fundamental contrast with virtually all Nato countries —whatever their faults, and there are many. The citizens there elect their government, and their fundamental human rights are respected, including that women enjoy equal rights to get an education, are not told what clothes to wear by men, can go to university, and have leadership positions in government — all of which are denied in the countries Lagardien sympathises with.

This is a fundamental world view that helps justify the grouping of democratic countries into blocs that share and defend those world views against those countries that do not.

Jonathan Schrire
Kenilworth

JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your comments to letters@businesslive.co.za. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.​