Sir: My letter (5 April) complained of the apparent lack of any response to Michael Foot's film on the war in the former Yugoslavia. If Geoffrey Best (Letters, 8 April) has reckoned "what international political arrangements ... are most likely ... to deal effectively" with the violent dismemberment of the state of Bosnia-Herzegovina, why, instead of berating me, does he not put right what I complained of by advocating those arrangements?
Is it that he feels irritation with me more strongly than distress at the Bosnian situation? Or is there some reason directed by "intelligence, not passion"? If he really has something to propose, I beg him to propose it; if not, I beg him to desist from moralising about not being moralistic.