Readers' letters: Hope can still triumph over fear in this time of strife

Unfortunately the hope over fear pragmatism that came after the Second World War that kept world order has been replaced by the promotion of selfish desire over the common good. Egoism over altruism. As your editorial argues, those institutions meant to uphold international law like the UN have become largely irrelevant and replaced by contempt from Putin and recklessness from Trump.

The story of Easter is one of transforming despair into triumph. Institutions like the UN and Nato were born out of the ashes of the two world wars and have kept peace for over 80 years. It’s surely time our leaders woke up to the prospect of another world war and took collective responsibility for future peace through cooperation and respect for such institutions and the principles they represent.

Neil Anderson, Edinburgh

Remove US bases

With Donald Trump’s boast that he will bomb the ancient civilisation of Iran back to the Stone Age, surely the time has come to remove US bases from our territory. Keir Starmer’s pretext that we are only allowing their use for defensive purposes has now worn thin, and Britain should no longer be complicit in what is now a war of revenge carried out by Trump at the behest of Benjamin Netanyahu. Allowing a foreign country to have bases in the UK made some sense when as part of Nato they were a shield against Soviet and later Russian aggression. Now Trump has expressed his utter contempt for Nato they are an anachronism.

As a first step Britain should refuse permission for all Iran-related flights from these bases and for the use of our airspace. Then negotiations should begin for the removal of remaining US bases in the UK within a reasonable time period.

Robert Cairns, Cupar, Fife

Royal visit

I must disagree with Trevor Rigg (Letters, 3 April) when he says the King should not visit the United States at present because of the actions and pronouncements of the current President.

The USA is by far the greatest English-speaking nation in the world and one with whom the UK shares many democratic ideals and practices, and with which we have many family connections both recent and long-established. Whatever one may think of the current President he was duly elected in accordance with the US constitution and will very soon have to demit office likewise.

The 250th anniversary of the founding of the USA is a significant event and it is right and proper that it should be acknowledged by His Majesty as the representative of the UK.

S Beck. Edinburgh

System listing

Ian Waugh (Letters, 4 April) misses the point. Of course we all know that in 2021 most Conservative and Labour MSPs were not constituency MSPs but were chosen on their respective party lists. As he says, these parties also have constituency MSPs; the Greens have none. And Mr Waugh correctly says that the Liberal Democrats’ four MSPs are all constituency representatives. That is where the real contrast lies.

The Lib Dems have half of the number of MSPs that the Greens have. All of the former are constituency MSPs, all of the latter are list MSPs. The Lib Dems stood in most of the constituencies, the Greens in 12. In 2026 the Greens, laughing at us, will stand a mere six candidates in constituencies. Why waste effort and money in standing more when they can mop up on the list?

A more appropriate system would be to require that parties should stand candidates in at least half of the constituencies to be eligible to have candidates on the regional lists. D’Hondt should be scrapped.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

Please explain

Would someone more intelligent than myself care to tell me the end difference between multi-methods of voting and straightforward first past the post when it comes to who has a seat, and indeed how long it would take to create a coalition government.

The theory and practice of the multi-method of selection is an admirable intent, but really the end result is not much different from first past the post. The latter is not to everyone’s liking, but it does provide for clear leadership. In countries with multi-party elections, agreeing a coalition government can be strenuous and it only takes the departure of one of the parties for it to collapse.

Charles Lowson, Fareham, Hants

Ban polls

I agree with George Foulkes (Perpective, 2 April): excessive opinion poll reporting affects voting patterns and often the simplistic conclusions widely reported following them influence what voters think about when making their choice. Perhaps they should be banned a month before an election so that the electorate can think for themselves.

Rod Murray, Edinburgh

Don’t panic

If drivers kept their vehicles constantly topped up with fuel, this would ease the need elsewhere and also eliminate reported panic buying. In my experience most people drive about with little in reserve, and so filling stations soon have to close or ration fuel.

Malcolm Parkin, Kinnesswood, Kinross-shire

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, and in the body of the email – no attachments – and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. No poems.