Your editorial "Nobel Peace Laureate" (Oct. 14) is itself a true prize winner. You concluded along with the committee that the accord itself laid solid foundations for the further development of democracy.
Democracy? At what price?
I commend Arias for his attempt at peace. I commend anyone anywhere who tries to reach settlements over a table rather than a battlefield. However, the argument is with the product itself. How can "a democracy" be attained, or a lasting peace be reached, when the first of steps calls for the removal of all U.S. support while allowing support of Cuba and the Soviet Union? If democracy is to breed, it must do so in an atmosphere that contains the elements of self-determination. What assurances does the plan contain that make you feel so secure that democracy, in any form, of any duration, will even be remotely possible?
I will give peace a chance, but only when it is a chance for a true peace, not based on "assurances" that were bargained away for the lives of the people of Nicaragua who died believing that this is what they were fighting and dying for.
Arias might well be worthy of the Nobel Prize, but the plan clearly is not. He must try again if he truly wants to attain the change through votes rather than weapons he so states. He may not be, but I am, as well as millions of others, aware of the oppression imposed on Soviet "republics." As long as the Soviets or Cubans can influence the outcome of the "peace" process, I, as a U.S. citizen, want to be represented as well.
MICHAEL D. NUTTER