But if we are so deep in, what can we do now that is positive for the future?

Kenneth Pollack, at Washington's Brookings Institution, in two recent articles (available online), argues there is a solution to the preoccupying Syrian crisis. The West should train and support a Syrian-led army, drawn from the millions of displaced Syrian refugees who want their country back, to tackle and defeat both IS and the also violent Assad regime. The US would work diplomatically to prevent the army's total victory, ensuring protection of minorities and a stake in the future for both Alawite Shia regime supporters and Sunni majority.

Pollack does not address Israel and Palestine, the still central problem that will pass a centenary of violent conflict quite soon. A similarly innovative and inclusive, albeit different and non-military, approach appears needed. But might success in Syria, which would also help stabilise its neighbour Iraq, presage a new future here?

Phil Potterton, Palmerston

In his latest piece of Orientalist claptrap blaming the West for all the ills of the Middle East, it's revealing that Amin Saikal omits any mention of the destructive role played by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the divisive role played by Iran now, and any blame the Arab nations have for their own misfortunes.

It's certainly not the West's fault that Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims are so often hell-bent on killing each other. It's also nothing to do with Israel's presence in east Jerusalem, which may contain Islam's third holiest site, but it contains Judaism's holiest, a fact seemingly irrelevant to Saikal. Similarly, the lack of tolerance for diverse views, subjugation of women and so many other ills of Arab society that hold back the region have nothing to do with the West or Israel.

Bizarrely, Saikal attacks the West for propping up dictators, for removing dictators, and for not having a strategy in the Arab Spring, when it basically left the region to itself. Clearly, the West is wrong no matter what it does. With all his criticism, Saikal offers no constructive suggestions, probably because he has none.

Jamie Hyams, senior policy analyst, Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council, South Melbourne, Vic

It is not easy to reconcile Prince Charles's claim that the current situation in the Middle East is linked to the climate change ("Prince points to environmental causes of conflict in the Middle East", November 24, p9) with what Tony Blair said last month.

Indeed, the former British prime minister apologised for the Iraq war which, he admitted, had contributed to the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.

If the world leaders were to take notice of Charles' remark, and stop attacking the Islamic State militants, it is not hard to work out who would emerge the winner.

Sam Nona, Burradoo, NSW

The juxtaposition of the contributions from Judy Aulich on a pluralist society and Alan Kelley on burqas (Letters, November 26) creates an even more compelling commentary about our way of life. Cultural pluralism is a condition in which minority groups participate fully in the dominant society, yet maintain their cultural differences (my emphasis). It is at the heart of multiculturalism.

Many of those cultural differences may seem regressive to us and somewhat inconsistent with a progressive society, but it is the embracing of those differences that ultimately make us a progressive pluralist society. So, as difficult as it is for many of us to see how a woman in a burqa can participate fully in our multicultural society (myself included), where and how do you draw the line on which of the many other regressive beliefs and practices held in most religions should be accepted in a multicultural society? I don't have the answer. Do you?

Philip White, Crace

It's all very well for National Trust spokesman Eric Martin to be outraged over the call-in powers used to commence demolition of the Northbourne Avenue flats ("Heritage 'call-in' action cops flak", November 26,p1), but he doesn't have to live in them.

Let's be realistic here. The public housing units were never high quality, cutting edge innovative architecture, but cheaply built, bog standard Bauhaus wannabe imitations, built 20 or more years after they would have been cutting edge. They looked fabulously square, sparse and minimal when first built, but like much of the architect Mies van der Rohe's work, paid no attention to aspect or the climate they were built for, nor the comfort of the people who would live in them. Even when brand new, the west-facing two story flats were boiling hot in summer, with no awnings, or shade, and freezing in winter. Who is going to pay to maintain and restore these eyesores?

And presumably no alterations could be made to their external appearance, such as adding large balconies or awnings, as that would be a desecration of their integrity.

Take one look at the various makeshift attempts by the current residents in the slums to try to make their accommodation more habitable such as stringing up shade-cloth, sheets and screening to see how vile they are to live in. Instead, imagine the possibilities of north-facing, large balconied, double-glazed apartments, providing comfortable accommodation for thousands.

Robert Henderson, Lyneham

Hugh White's recommendation that Australia should not rely on allies for security but must be capable of "defending our own territory from any credible threats" ("We can't rely on our allies", Times2, November 24, p1), does appear to be an unfortunate necessity in the threatening world we have created. Obviously the threats would be much reduced if efforts to achieve a co-operative resolution were more successful.

One is reminded of the Australian government's inspiring initiative in 1995, the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, which set out clear, practical ways to transition to a less threatening, nuclear-free world. The report engaged leading military personnel and environmental activists of the day, and was presented to the United Nations. Though it must be said that the initiative has so far failed, the great benefits that would accrue to all nations if threats could be reduced or eliminated by simple, commonsense measures such as suggested in the Canberra Commission, demand that we must keep trying.

Harry Davis, Campbell

Former chief minister Jon Stanhope ("Stanhope against change of seat name", November 25, p2) contends that there was an "appalling lack of due process and transparency" during the ACT federal redistribution process. Mr Stanhope is naturally entitled to express this view, but this accusation fares poorly against the facts.

The Electoral Act enables both the names of electoral divisions and the placement of boundaries to be considered. It also provides several opportunities for the community to make suggestions, lodge objections or comment during the process. A wide range of community responses was received by the Redistribution Committee for the ACT, and all public submissions were considered and documented before its redistribution proposal report was released on September 11.

All public submissions have been promptly published on the AEC website over the course of the redistribution process together with comprehensive information regarding the redistribution, and of course the proposal report.

Before the names and boundaries of the ACT's two federal electoral divisions were considered by the Committee, a gazette notice was published (April 29, 2015) and advertisements were placed in both The Canberra Times and The Australian newspapers inviting people to submit suggestions. The AEC supplemented gazette notices and advertisements with media releases, and social media posts on the AEC Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Tom Rogers, Australian Electoral Commissioner

Jenna Price, writing beneath her familiar happy smiling face, is very upset because she thinks that medical students don't get sufficient instruction in doing abortions and that this might result in a critical shortage of abortionists ("Push to train doctors on carrying out abortions" Times2, November 24, p5) . Funny that, there seems to me to be no shortage of doctors happy to make their living by destroying pregnancies. Certainly not in our progressive territory.

Her article is illustrated by a photograph of the abdomen of a pregnant woman, clearly near full term. China has forced millions of women to undergo "abortions" at this stage of pregnancy which of course means killing a healthy infant. I don't know whether Ms Price is in favour of this practice, but if not, she should be more careful with her choice of illustrations.

Dr Alan N. Cowan, Yarralumla

Leon Arundell and Geoff Clarke (Letters, November 24) deride my pragmatic assessment of the outcomes of giving permission for cyclists to ride across pedestrian crossings at twice (or more) the pace of pedestrians. They should realise that if they rely on this inane provision and a road rule that applies to a pedestrian pace it will, literally, be their funeral.

I recommend that all users of pedestrian crossings adopt the French protocol. A pedestrian (or cyclist) will catch the eye of an approaching driver before stepping off the footpath. This not only ensures their safety as the driver will easily stop in time and ensures that it is a mutually satisfactory event — the pedestrian has politely asked for priority and the driver has pleasantly accepted the request. Toujours la politesse.

Michael Lane, NSW

PM'S GREATEST RISK

It would appear that the greatest risk to Malcolm Turnbull's prime ministership would be for him to read and take seriously all the adulatory articles and letters about him in the press.

H. Simon, Watson

WOMEN EXCLUDED

I'd like to ask Alan Kelley (Letters, November 26) how many women were elected Pope? How many women were reincarnated as Dalai Lama? Why attack Islam only when there is a whole suite of religion that excludes women in its senior hierarchy?

Joyce Wu, Lyneham

SPITE NOT NEEDED

I refer to Ric Hingee's complaint (Letters, November 25). I don't care one way or the other whether a letter to the editor is long, short or in between. But belittling or spiteful letters benefit nobody and reflect more on the writer than anyone else.

Patrick O'Hara, Isaacs

NO CREDIT FOR CASH

Full credit to the ABC for the program Hitting Home on domestic violence towards women. Too bad our new Minister for Women, Michaela Cash, did not appear on the following Q&A program to explain the government's position on dealing with this complex issue.

Margaret Langford, Braddon

GENDER IMBALANCE

So, addressing gender imbalance in the ACT Fire and Rescue workforce is "the right thing to do" (Letters, November 26). What about possible loss of life due to a skinny female firefighter being unable to move an unconscious person from a burning building? Will they only recruit females who are built like wharfies? That would be discrimination wouldn't it? At a possible coronial inquest, is the commissioner going to say, "Sorry but we have to keep up the gender balance"?

Eddie Boyd, Spence

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).