The problem with Pakistan first and foremost is its legitimacy as a nation-state. Pakistan was founded in 1947 purely as a consequence of political blackmail by Mohammed Ali Jinnah the leader of the Muslim League.

It was artificial then, and is artificial now. All nations have their problems, especially those of the former European colonial empires.

Pakistan's problem is unique in so far as its raison d'etre for its creation, Islam, is incompatible to pluralism and the secular democratic state.

It has had sixty-one years to prove it is a viable entity and how many times has it failed its original promises?

Pakistan is a repeat offender which does not accept any blame for its failures and is always the victim.

To justify its existence, Pakistan needs to start being genuinely democratic, secular and plural. Other Moslem states [as imperfect as they are] such as Indonesia, Turkey, and Malaysia at least attempt some form of plural secularism.

Why cannot Pakistan?

Pakistan should stop feeling sorry for itself and use its intellectual capacities in a more productive manner.

Kevin Connor, Kaleen

Occupation drags on

The recent spate of civilian killings in Afghanistan at the hands of NATO's International Security Assistance Force only reaffirms why the Afghan resistance must continue its struggle to free its country of foreign occupiers.

The US invaded Afghanistan in late 2001 following al Qaeda's attacks on the twin trade centres in New York.

It removed the Taliban from power in Kabul but has never been able to vanquish this organisation.

Instead of withdrawing its forces after the invasion, the US and its allies have remained as occupiers and drawn NATO into this unlawful conflict.

The US and NATO know that when they strike so-called Taliban targets, there is a very high likelihood of civilians being in and around them.

This is one of the major reasons the Afghan resistance is growing in strength and will continue to do so.

NATO and the US have no long-term plan for defeating the Afghan resistance. Their aim is to try and strengthen President Hamid Karzai's puppet Government in Kabul, just as the Russians tried to do with earlier puppets.

It is a fruitless and immoral endeavour because at its heart it imposes Western values and institutions at the point of a gun.

In the process hundreds of thousands of innocent Afghans have been killed.

Adam Bonner, Brogo, NSW

Respect for Russia

It is only 70 years ago that the Russian people had to suffer the Yezhovina depredations of their own Georgian leader, Joseph Stalin; 65 years ago that they suffered the terrible depredations of the Nazi hordes; 60 years ago that Stalin sent the next great wave to the Gulag after their heroic efforts in the Great Patriotic War; and finally it is only 17 years ago that their familiar if tawdry social and political edifice crashed around their ears.

I wish that the West, and especially the Americans, would stop confronting the Russian people belligerently all the time. The Russians deserve a bit of respect and a bit of time and space to work things out, not have their noses tweaked continually by Bush, NATO, the EU and the Poles.

Kenneth Griffiths, O'Connor

D. Taylor's Stalinist revision of history (Letters, August 19) in support of the Russian position in Georgia is a posture I had thought long discarded for its dishonesty.

Factually, he is wrong in stating that the Argentine cruiser Belgrano was sunk by the British after the end of hostilities. The Belgrano was sunk on May 2, 1982, some six weeks before the final battles ended the war on June 14.

Ideologically, his tacit support of the Taliban is simply cringeworthy.

Using misinformation and false premises to make big statements about the motives of the Western nations is the last resort of the intellectually lazy and complacent Left.

Alan Lewis, Chifley