It is unfortunate that the US has suspended its Peace Corps program in Nepal (Peace Corps pull out, #214). Although the US ambassador has stated that this action would attract Washington DC's attention to help Nepal fight against the Maoist problem, it is likely that this may not be the case. The attack at the US centre and the suspension of the Peace Corps program leaves Nepal in a difficult position to use the American friendship in the Maoist problem. US businesses and individuals are scared of going to Nepal, and due to Nepal's political volatility, it is difficult for foreign nations like the US to extend a helping hand. Pouring foreign donations or weapons-as Nepal may expect-may not be the solution when the political leaders know very little about conflict management. This is a time for leaders, especially for King Gyanendra and Deuba, to show the true essence of leadership. If they fail, it is bitter but true that they too may be the roadblock to Nepal's healthy future.

Name withheld,
Flagstaff, Arizona, USA

. What kind of message does our pullout of the Peace Corps send to the Maoists? We have always told the Nepalis we want Nepal to stand up to the Maoists. We gave them guns and training to fight the rebels. And when a small blast goes off in the American Centre, we pack up our bags and leave! American double standards around the world we have come to expect under the Bush administration. But to make the Peace Corps the pawn in our 'global war on terror' is repugnant. At a time when America needs to reinvent itself and promote institutions like the Peace Corps to regain our lost respect in the world, we close down the very thing that would have done that for us.

Ex-Peace Corps Volunteer,
email

. When the 12 young Nepalis were needlessly killed in Iraq and the world press turned their backs almost as if it had not happened, I was struck that the Nepali Press did not ask: why did the US create the conditions in Iraq that lead to these horrible deaths? For years and years, young Nepalis have headed to the Middle East and other destinations in search of better lives. Money was earned, saved, sent home and when the workers returned to Nepal there was often money for a new home, a new wife, a new life.

It was not until the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, which UN Secretary General Kofi Annan described as 'illegal', that conditions existed in the Middle East where 12 Nepali workers would be killed for nothing! Without the conditions that are the result of the backwards Foreign Policy of the Bush Regime, I believe those young men would be alive today.

Now we read that the Peace Corps has been suspended and evacuated and that the US has promised $1 million more for arms and war in Nepal. Would it not have been better to 'evacuate' US military advisers and their $22 million of war materials, and leave the Peace Corps in place? Will Nepal, like Iraq, become another victim of US foreign policy, in the name of 'building democracy'? Do the Nepali people want Nepal to be the next Iraq?

Only when the king or his representatives and the politicians sit down at the table with the Maoists and tell the Bush administration to mind its own business and stay out of the internal affairs of Nepal will there be a chance for peace in Nepal. Maybe then, when the guns are gone, the Peace Corps can return.

D Michael Van De Veer
Hawaii

. Indian investments have been bombed and destroyed, Indian schools have been set on fire and vandalised, the Maoists have been threatened to send 'human bombs' against Indian leaders if they help the Nepal government against the Maoists. Yet, the Indians are still here. The American Centre is hit by a small blast, and the Americans pull out in droves. We don't really need much proof of who Nepal's real friends are.

J K Panday
Kathmandu