Madam, - George Bush has been supportive of Israel's actions in Lebanon. This does not surprise many people, but on examination it is a huge contradiction in American foreign policy.
On the one hand the Americans argue that Israel has a right to defend itself, but they seem to have forgotten they also have an interest in a successful Lebanon. Since the end of the civil war there, Lebanon has been on its way to becoming an unprecedented success story in cross party co-operation. This is George Bush's dream scenario for Iraq and now it is being threatened because Israel doesn't want to be outsmarted.
It was obvious from the start that Hizbullah's attack on the Israeli border post was a tactical move and did not really represent the reopening of a Lebanese front. It was designed to support the people of Gaza. Instead of attempting to negotiate the release of their soldiers, Israel decided to make the Lebanese people pay. How are the Lebanese people supposed to respond to that? They don't have any option. To attempt to disarm Hizbullah would start another civil war.
The only benefit Israel gains by this action is to make the Israeli public feel good about themselves, to show that Israel's hand cannot be forced. For this, 100 Lebanese had to die, and the power-sharing arrangement in Lebanon is put under enormous stress. How can the US support that?
Lebanon is the model for Iraq. Why is a transient Israeli tactical advantage more important than the success of Lebanon or Iraq? George Bush should realise that US interests in the Middle East are not being served by the continuing Israeli actions. - Yours, etc,
MICHAEL BERMINGHAM.
Droichead na Dothra,
Baile Átha Cliath 4.
****
Madam, - Why does the civilised world stand idly by while Israel murders large numbers of innocent civilians in Gaza and Lebanon?
I do not condone the taking of Israeli troops as hostages, but the response has been way over the top. To date more than 100 innocent civilians have been killed by Israeli action in Gaza and Lebanon.
In addition, can anyone explain why it is necessary to deprive innocent citizens of their basic right to electricity, water and sanitary services, the destruction of which appear to serve no useful purpose whatsoever? Similarly, the attack on Beirut International Airport and the blockading of the country's ports are needless and pointless.
When are democratic governments going to condemn what the Israelis are doing? On a personal level, I absolutely refuse, and have done for many years, to purchase any Israeli-produced goods. - Yours, etc,
WE SHEPHERD,
Blackwater,
Co Wexford.
****
Madam, - As Senator Brendan Ryan well knows when he refers to "the murder of innocent civilians, many of them children" (July 15th), murder is the deliberate, premeditated unlawful killing of another human being. Israel has not "murdered" any civilians.
The civilians killed in the Israeli retaliation against Gaza and Lebanon for the respective invasions by Hamas and Hizbullah were not targeted by Israel.
Israel aims to hit only military targets and infrastructure that helps the military. Civilians have never been targeted, but they are killed collaterally, and often because Islamicist fighters purposely choose to hide and fight from among civilians, or pretend to be civilians.
Islamicist fighters (including Palestinians), on the other hand, deliberately and openly target Israeli civilians, in schools, shops, restaurants, nightclubs, buses, etc, with no military target in sight.
The death statistics for the period October 2000 to December 2003 show this up: for every Palestinian combatant killed by Israelis, 0.7 non-combatants were killed. For every Israeli combatant killed, 3.6 non-combatants were killed. - Yours etc,
TONY ALLWRIGHT,
Killiney,
Co Dublin.
****
Madam, - So the prevailing moral imperative in the Middle East is Israel's "right to defend herself", according to bully boys Blair and Bush. What, one may ask, is then left to the Lebanese and Palestinian civilians, men, women and children? Merely the "right" to be incinerated in the Israeli blitzkrieg? How reassuring, how moral, how Christian. - Yours, etc,
Senator DAVID NORRIS,
Seanad Éireann,
Dublin 2.
Madam, - Paul Scanlon (July 14th) claims that the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza was part of a broader political strategy and may have been some sort of diversion from the construction of the wall between the West Bank and pre-1967 Israel. Working on that premise, perhaps Israel's most recent incursion into Lebanon was a calculated ploy to divert attention from hostilities in Gaza.
Nobody is denying that Palestinians have suffered greatly during the intifada, as have many Israelis. However, no matter how blunt it may appear, if an electorate votes in politicians that have openly campaigned for the destruction of Israel while "driving the Jews into the sea", then it must be prepared to face the consequences. Israel has a right to defend itself and has been doing so since its creation in 1947.
Mr Scanlon accuses Israel of trampling on Palestinian human rights and ignoring international law. As usual, not only he, but the Irish media at large pay scant attention to the sufferings of thousands of Israelis who have been the victims or terrorist campaigns that have always defied not only international law, but basic human decency. Blowing up buses full of innocents is not a convincing method of Palestinians defending themselves. It only incurs further wrath from a nation that has had to contend with such awful attacks since its inception. Is Mr Scanlon aware that Israelis have suffered terribly at the hands of terrorism? Does he know that "suffering" has been second nature to the Jewish people since the time of Abraham?
Little mention is made of the fact that Israel is a democratic society founded on similar principles to our State, but has had to remain on a permanent war footing because of Arab and Palestinian hostility. Most Israelis would prefer not to have to do army service to defend their country against those who campaign for its destruction. Sadly, the status quo will remain so long as Israel has to defend itself against constant terrorist incursions that so many in the media have failed to condemn. Until the Palestinian nation accepts that Israel will never give in to those that want to destroy her, the future is indeed bleak.
Regrettably, suffering on both sides will continue until the Palestinian people elect leaders who are willing to come to the negotiating table after ceasing all hostilities and acknowledge that there is room for two nations to co-exist peacefully. So to answer Scanlon's final question, yes these are the actions of a democratic country. - Yours, etc,
DAVID PETER FINE,
St Pappin's Road,
Dublin 11.
****
Madam, - Few things educate better than experience. After completing a 2,000-mile journey by bicycle to the Holy Land and spending a week there I have returned a newly educated person.
To see at first hand the wall that separates the Palestinians from the Israelis is saddening in the extreme. My visit brought me to Bethlehem, which the locals rightly describe as an open prison. They are cut off from employment and economic opportunities. They are cut off from their own land and even their own families. They do not have control over their own water or electricity supplies.
Passing through the checkpoint controls into the town, I felt humiliated, intimidated and fundamentally disrespected. Fortunately for me, I only had that experience twice; Palestinians "lucky" enough to have permits into Israel are subjected to the experience twice daily.
It is clear who are the oppressors and who the oppressed. - Yours, etc,
ELEANOR DUNN,
Chapelizod,
Dublin 20.