Letters

Inside the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

"Oil-hungry Americans are the chief source of funds for the Saudis, who have long financed terrorist groups. Whose side are we on?" CHRISTOPHER CARLSON Minneapolis, Minn.

Your article on Saudi Arabia and its state religion, Wahhabism, revealed the limitations of the U.S.'s strategy in the war on terrorists [AFTER 9/11: THE SAUDIS, Sept. 15]. Afghanistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia or any other state is not our ultimate enemy in this war; intolerant beliefs like Wahhabism are. Installing friendly governments in Afghanistan and Iraq or dropping smart bombs is not enough to defeat that enemy. We must invest in the foundations of Islamic society and support the mosques, madrasahs and imams committed to a moderate, tolerant and responsible interpretation of Islam. MARK LENZ New York City

In searching for the root cause of 9/11, many Americans have long suspected that we need look no further than Riyadh. Whether financing terrorists with oil money or indoctrinating them with fanatical hatred of the West, Saudi Arabia should be viewed not as America's ally but as the primary target in the war on terrorism. MATT SCOTT Rockwall, Texas

We Saudis are tired of being considered evil. We live in an independent and sovereign country. What we do with our money is not the U.S.'s business. Do we interfere in America's private affairs? MOHAMMED AL-TAZZIN Riyadh

The scattered arrests of Islamic militants hardly address the true threat that is woven into the fabric of Saudi society. The Bush Administration's actions in Iraq were supposed to rewrite U.S. policy in the Middle East, in effect proclaiming that autocratic, patrimonial rule would no longer be tolerated. But will we extend that same message to regimes that accommodate our need for oil? U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East can no longer afford to use soft words and receive token support from countries like Saudi Arabia that benefit our immediate interests but are unwilling to pursue and punish those who pose the gravest threats to the U.S. NICK WETZLER Portland, Ore.

Americans have always been interested in just one aspect of Saudi Arabia: oil. You have never dealt with our culture or our religion in a meaningful way, nor have you tried to understand our way of living and thinking. So why should we make concessions to the U.S. now? ZAHRA WAHIDA MEIOUN Dhahran, Saudi Arabia

Those who died on 9/11 deserve more than a cover-up of uncomfortable truths, including the fact that Saudi Arabia is no friend of the U.S. SCOTT KILHEFNER Cape Coral, Fla.

The accusations against Saudi Arabia's fundamentalist Muslims are curious. Don't Osama bin Laden and the fundamentalists claim that the U.S. war on terrorism is really a war against Islam? If the U.S. continues on its present path, even more people will agree with the theory that the target is Islam, not terrorists. If we ask Saudi Arabia to change its religious beliefs, maybe we should ask a few fundamentalist groups in the U.S. to alter theirs too. After all, some of their leaders constantly attack Islam (and Catholicism). Their hateful preaching might make a few Wahhabis blush. Let us first stop the hate at home. PIETRO COSTA San Jose, Calif.

The war on terrorism really is a holy war, since so many moderate Muslims are standing by silently, out of complicity or fear, while gangsterlike extremists are defining a militant Islam for the next generation. THOMAS W. DRAPER Provo, Utah

It is an appalling irony that the U.S.'s addiction to oil (notably for large and powerful motor vehicles) not only props up Middle East tyrannies but also funds people dedicated to destroying America. Changing our automobile-dependent lifestyle would be immensely difficult and disruptive and would involve major battles with business interests, yet we absolutely must reduce our demand for petroleum to a level that can be supplied by countries that don't have links to international terrorism. ROY A. MATTHEWS Ottawa

>> Readers had mixed feelings about the Sept. 15 cover illustration. While an Ohio woman was "relieved that TIME tastefully acknowledged the second anniversary of 9/11 without resorting to garish displays," a Californian was not pleased, declaring, "Those three scowling, sunglasses-wearing men look as if you plucked them out of a cheap music video. It's an ugly stereotype, pandering to our worst prejudices." And a Belgian was even more piqued, saying, "Rarely have I seen a more racist cover picture or one more likely to reinforce misguided nationalism and resentment on both sides of the world."

Terrorist Breeding Grounds

In "Islam's Other Hot Spots" [After 9/11: Roots Of Terror, Sept. 15], you quoted a Pakistani Muslim student as saying "Since the days of the Prophet, there are only two forces on earth, Muslims and infidels. And their fight will go on until Judgment Day." That remark reminds me of the Marxist view that the world is divided into proletarians and capitalists. We're well aware of the destructive result of this doctrine. Unless Muslims can overcome the simplistic vision of the world as a place of two antagonistic realms, of believers and infidels, and embrace cultural diversity and religious tolerance, their relationship with the West will inevitably lead to conflict. GEORG SCHWARZMANN Columbia, S.C.

We need to hammer the two epicenters of terrorism, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, our backstabbing allies. Saudi Arabia may be the cradle of Islam, and Pakistan may have the bomb, but these two countries are playing us for fools. PETER D'BRASS Fort Worth, Texas

9/11: Two Years Later

In "Life During Wartime," Nancy Gibbs asserted that in Iraq, "true victory will take more time, cost more lives and consume more treasure than [those who backed the war] had ever reckoned" [AFTER 9/11: WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?, Sept. 15]. That statement is undoubtedly true. But the idea that even those who opposed the war "now have to accept that there is no turning back" is absurd. There are plenty of patriotic Americans who don't accept President Bush's course of action. Freeing Iraq from Saddam Hussein is a noble cause. The problem is that we have failed. Saddam is still alive, and our swaggering has created worldwide resentment against the U.S. and increased terrorism. DOREEN PUGH Valley Stream, N.Y.

Gibbs wrote that two years ago we lost our belief that "our world was safe." I'm glad she felt safe and secure before 9/11, but I didn't. After the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, I believed it was only a matter of time before terrorists, either foreign or American, would be successful in New York City. FRED RUECKHER New York City

Sweet Alternatives

Re "How Safe Are Sugar Substitutes?" [Your Time: Health, Sept. 15]: The safety of approved low-calorie sweeteners is not questionable. Before a food additive is approved by the Food and Drug Administration, it must undergo rigorous testing and scientific peer review. For millions of people, low-calorie sweeteners and the products that contain them are a way to reduce calories--which, as studies have shown, can help consumers lose weight and keep it off. In fact, reducing caloric intake by just 44 calories a day over the course of a year can result in a 5-lb. weight loss. BETH HUBRICH ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR CALORIE CONTROL COUNCIL Atlanta

The Outlook in Iraq

In "Al-Qaeda's New Home" [After 9/11: The Iraq Mess, Sept. 15], you described how bin Laden's network is rallying new recruits to battle U.S. forces in Iraq. It seems likely that the same political situation that made it possible for the Taliban to take control in Afghanistan will now emerge in Iraq. Foreign, mainly Arab, volunteers may enter the country in massive numbers, carrying with them one great desire: to fight the U.S. soldiers who occupy the country. The foreseeable future looks bleak when one takes into account that the voluntary jihadists have a clear-cut goal and a fanatic determination and that the U.S. won't easily withdraw its troops from Iraq. MOSES NDELEBE Pretoria

Bin Laden's al-Qaeda network remains a global terrorist threat. The challenge for the modern democracy is to protect individual liberties and at the same time act decisively against terrorists without turning into a militarized police state. We need to form a worldwide coalition of democratic countries, adopt national and international legislation that strengthens law-enforcing agencies and fight terrorism with global coordination. AMIT PRADHAN Baroda, India

Only half a year after the U.S. in effect declared the U.N. irrelevant and went to war in open disregard of it, the Bush Administration is asking the people of other nations to pay for America's miscalculation and the resultant chaos in Iraq. Even though the mess was created by America and Britain, the U.N. should try to assist the suffering Iraqi people as best it can. But any step to accommodate the U.S. and Britain should be contingent upon their renewed and unambiguous commitment to respect the U.N. FREDRIK S. HEFFERMEHL Oslo

The Bush Administration seems to expect other countries to share in the body count. If the U.S. had treated other nations as equals, they might be willing to salvage the situation for a fumbling U.S. Administration and a feeble British government. The U.S. cannot afford another Vietnam. Nor can the world. GERRIT DEJONG Nesoddtangen, Norway

A Cheese by Any Other Name

Re your item on the efforts of some countries to protect the trade names of regional foods [NOTEBOOK, Aug. 11]: The issue is not protectionism but food quality and the years of experience that produce masterpieces like Parma ham and Parmesan cheese. I cannot expect to find an appreciation of food culture in a country whose biggest contribution to cuisine is the Big Mac, but Americans should understand why our food is so region-specific. Parmesan cheese owes its unique taste to conditions found only around Parma, Italy, and to the grass that is eaten by local cows. Americans will never be able to make real Parmesan cheese. PAOLO PASQUALE Genoa, Italy

What Now for the U.N.?

Re the questions posed by TIME to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan [10 QUESTIONS, Sept. 15]: Here's one more. How are U.N. resolutions relevant if the U.N. cannot or will not enforce them? MATTHEW J. JOHNSON Minneapolis, Minn.

A Shift in Focus Needed

Sadly, your fearless forecasts about the worlds of science, medicine, technology, design, the arts and more do not promise a shift in human consciousness [WHAT'S NEXT, Sept. 8]. If we do not pay attention to the emotional and spiritual development of our children and ourselves, the problems of social injustice, extreme economic disparities, ecological devastation and the use of violence to resolve conflicts will continue and indeed get worse, notwithstanding all the advances in technology. DEEPAK CHOPRA, M.D. THE CHOPRA CENTER FOR WELL BEING La Jolla, Calif.