Sir, – The recent intervention by President Michael D Higgins concerning the alleged Israeli threat to Irish troops is understandable and is, no doubt, motivated by genuine concern for the safety of those troops. It is also unwise and not quite accurate (“‘We have not received threats’: Unifil spokesman responds to claim made by President Higgins on Irish troops in Lebanon”, News, October 7th).
Article 13 of Bunreacht na hÉireann, in particular Articles 13.9 and 13.11, place very strict constraints on how any president may exercise his powers, while Article 29.4.1 allocates external relations to the executive. The current incumbent, as upholder of the Constitution, should be expected not to transgress any of its provisions. Unless he had advice or permission from the Government to issue his statement, he would appear to have done so in this instance. In the light of the most recent Unifil statement on the matter, in which it was denied that any such threat was issued, his intervention would also appear to have been based on an incomplete understanding of the facts.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF), along with all parties in the current conflict in Lebanon, do of course pose a threat to all Unifil troops. Indeed, since 1978, the force has suffered casualties, including Irish dead and wounded, as a result of hostile action by Hizbullah and IDF, in some instances directly, but also from their proxies. The current deployment of the IDF close to an Irish Unifil post does indeed constitute a very real threat to troops in that post. This is a tactic also employed regularly by Hizbullah in the past. It is equally unacceptable when employed by the IDF. It is to be protested and called out by the competent authorities – Unifil, the Taoiseach, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and relevant Defence Forces authorities, when in possession of all the facts.
Meanwhile the President might consider remaining within the constraints of his office. If incapable of, or unwilling to do so, he should at least check his facts before speaking out. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL O’DWYER,
Clogheen,
Cork.
Sir, – While accepting that Michael D Higgins continues to enjoy the support of a majority of the Irish people, I fear that a sizeable and growing minority, of which I am one, have growing misgivings about his various political incursions of recent years.
I may be mistaken in my recollection, but I have a sense that he was less politically loquacious during his first term in office, which he had assured us was to be his only term in the presidency. His second term has been peppered with his various musings on political matters, both domestic and external. I am aware enough to be able to detect the nuance in the President’s statements and locate their genesis in his previous career as a Labour TD and minister. My concern now is for the office of the presidency, and the behaviour of future holders of the highest position in the land, who may be emboldened by the current incumbent’s blurring of the lines with his politically charged pronouncements. – Yours, etc,
FRANK WALSH,
Coolballow,
Co Wexford.
Sir, – The Government should consider making the post of Minister for Foreign Affairs redundant as it appears President Higgins has appointed himself to this ministry. – Yours, etc,
R WHELAN,
Greystones,
Co Wicklow.
Sir, – The Unifil troops are deployed on the Lebanon-Israel border to maintain peace and security in the region.
Notwithstanding the risk our troops place themselves in, is it not fair to now say this mission is a failed one and should be disbanded immediately to protect our troops? – Yours, etc,
SIMON BLAKE,
Munich,
Germany.