I NOTE with interest the Agenda contribution from Lindsay Mackenzie (“Dangers lie ahead in the shifting relationship of Russia and Nato”, The Herald, September 29). Nato has become a form of endless military Keynesianism for key members – an argument that is difficult to counter. Its fundamental reason for existing disappeared in 1991 when the USSR collapsed.

Surveys among Nato members have shown there is less and less public support for fulfilling the crucial part of the regional treaty that requires them to defend another country in the alliance. But little is expected to happen as a consequence – publicly funded organisations discourage value for money audits, as we have discovered even in the UK.

There is however a case for a global security organisation, but this would involve a degree of multilateralism in the world that last week's report from the Independent Commission on Multilateralism emphasised is missing.

Ian Jenkins,

7 Spruce Avenue, Hamilton.