Letter: Why we should intervene in Bosnia
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Discussing the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Colin Welch (Comment, 19 April) sees the solution in the West's backing the assumed winners, ie the Serbian aggressor:
Our armed presence at the victor's side would give us at last some power to halt or prevent atrocities, to compel chivalrous behaviour.
He suggests that the West should accept the right of the strongest, however amoral and evil it may be. The non-interference policy of the West is shameful enough, but this idea is repulsive. If Mr Welch had been asked about Nazi Germany's aggression in Europe in 1942, would he have chosen to support it because the Germans seemed to be the winners at that moment?
Yours faithfully,
NINA van VEEN
Bridel, Luxembourg
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments