U.S. Policy in Nicaragua

As one of two members of my profession who went to Washington to lobby on Capitol Hill against aid to the contras , I resent your snide reference in your editorial (April 17), “An Empty Call to Battle,” to “obligatory Hollywood types” as part of the “backers of the Sandinistas” who are “concocting an extravaganza” in their behalf.

Objectivity apparently requires, in your mind, criticism of what you see as “both sides” so that you can demonstrate your rectitude while still making it clear that you are not “soft on communism.”

Such intrepid journalism not only does a disservice to Robert Foxworth and me, but also to the thousands of other Americans from all walks of life who went to Washington, wrote letters, called, sent wires or visited local congressional offices to express their profound disagreement with President Reagan’s illegal and immoral war.

We do so as patriotic Americans who believe that overt or covert association with terrorism does damage to the fabric of this nation, insults our integrity and demeans the stated ideals of our Founding Fathers, whom Reagan insists upon dragging into the fray (a fact that makes one wish the dead could sue for libel).

For those of us who have been to Nicaragua, fair reporting would note that we have lauded government policies and practices that are seen to be beneficial to the people and criticized those that are not. The government of Nicaragua is neither the evil scourge Reagan has painted it to be, nor the vision of purity others maintain. Neither, judging from its current position in the international arena, is the government of the United States.

It is the stated beliefs and goals, and policies that manifest same, that ought to be the subject of open and fair debate, and on that score the jury isn’t in yet. Reagan and his cadre of anti-Communist zealots want to practice international preventive detention based upon their presumption that they know better than the people of Nicaragua what is best for the people of Nicaragua.

Reagan is wrong. If we close our eyes to that fact and our responsibility in the face of it, we will be just as wrong.

MIKE FARRELL

Sherman Oaks