Madam, - Labour councillor John McManus (August 1st) is right when he says "there is confusion and some plain bad politics being propagated by some on the left" with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the threat posed by growing Islamic fundamentalists. His colleague, Cllr Aidan Culhane (August 3rd) is also right to acknowledge that "the left is too ambiguous" about those who want to bring the Middle East back to the Middle Ages and that it has failed to come to terms with Islamic fanaticism. However, in fairness, this criticism is not exclusively a malaise of the left. It also applies to some politicians within all of our political parties and to a number of independent TDs and senators.
Trevor Sargent TD, as leader of the Green Party, lumbered into the tragic Israeli-Lebanese conflict with a call last Friday for both diplomatic and trade sanctions against Israel "given the country's refusal to date to call a ceasefire." No such call was made for sanctions on either Iran or Syria for using Hizbullah to provoke the conflict or for funding and arming that organisation's fundamentalist militants.
Mr Sargent's statement was made on a day when more than 230 rockets provided by Iran were fired indiscriminately by Hizbullah fanatics into Israeli cities and towns. The Greens and, apparently, the Joint Oireachtas Foreign Affairs Committee - whose members are supposed to understand the history and complexities of the conflicts in the Middle East - have adopted the politically unique and disgraceful position of proposing that sanctions be imposed on Israel for defending itself against attack by a fanatical terrorist group committed to its destruction and which to date is responsible for the death of over 100 Israelis and for injuring over 700. Too many members of the Oireachtas are ensnared in Michael D Higgins's world of knee-jerk anti-Americanism and dewy-eyed sentimentality and appeasement when confronted by Islamic fundamentalism.
Joschka Fischer, former German foreign minister and leader of the German Greens for over 20 years got it right in The Irish Times of July 28th when he wrote that "the current war in Lebanon is not a war by the Arab world against Israel: rather it is a war of the region's radical forces - Hamas, Islamic Jihad among the Palestinians, Hizbullah together with Syria and Iran - that fundamentally reject any settlement with Israel". Politicians on this island will have something relevant to contribute to the resolution of the current conflict only when they wake up to this reality.
What we need is better politics. In particular, we need our elected politicians to address the role Iran has played over the past 15 years in sabotaging the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and to understand that the Iranian president's call to wipe Israel off the map is not mere fanciful rhetoric. Perhaps this is something members of the Joint Oireachtas Foreign Affairs Committee are presently loath to do for fear that if they criticise the Iranian regime that committee's current open invitation for a junket to Tehran might be withdrawn.
For now, Iran is apparently a four letter word that members of that Committee dare not utter in criticism. Is it too much to hope that they will have the courage during their autumn visit to Tehran to ask the hard questions and advocate a radical change in Iranian policy? - Yours, etc,
ALAN SHATTER,
Upper Ely Place,
Dublin 2.
Madam, - As residents of Beirut, we have read your paper's coverage of the situation in Lebanon with both interest and dismay. Allow us to ask some questions that we feel have not been addressed by your coverage and analysis. Where were the Israeli soldiers captured - in Israel or on Lebanese soil? Is the capture and exchange of soldiers an unprecedented outrage or a common practice in the region? Does Hizbullah want to capture soldiers merely because it can or because it wants to free Lebanese men, women, and children who are in Israeli prisons?
How did those first four Israeli soldiers die - in a Hizbullah attack or by hitting a mine? Which came first - the rocket barrage from Hizbullah or the Israeli bombardment? Was the Israeli invasion a legitimate defence of its territory or a plan hatched long before in the infamous "Clean Break" document and in visits to the US in May (Olmert) and June (Netanyahu at the American Enterprise Institute in Colorado)? Does Hizbullah deny the right of Israel to exist or deny the legitimacy of the state of Israel and its apartheid system?
Does Israel believe that the Lebanese army can really take over in the South when any Beiruti knows that Lebanese soldiers are little more than traffic cops with guns? Can the Lebanese army defend Lebanon or, as Noam Chomsky notes, is Hizbullah the only protection it has? What does Israel want more: a 20-mile security zone or precious water from the Litani River? Is Israel a helpless victim of terrorism or a perpetrator of state terrorism? The utter calumny of accusing Hizbullah of using women and children as human shields does not deserve formulation into a rhetorical question.
We look forward to reading your answers. - Yours, etc,
COLLEEN MacDONELL and DOMINIC LARKIN,
Beirut,
Lebanon (currently in Cork).
Madam, - Further to various letters and columns on Israel's relationship with the US, one might bear in mind that in the short term it may suit US governments' regional strategic goals to support Israel. However, in the medium and long term this is not assured. If access to oil and/or closer links with stridently Islamic, anti-Israel states become the priority, then whither Israel?
The present and future difficulties concerning the continued existence of Israel should not be underestimated. - Yours, etc,
SEAN CASSIDY,
Gardiner Street,
Dublin 1.
Madam, - The suggestion that I am at odds with my party over Lebanon is not fully correct. I fully support Michael D Higgins's long-standing call for an immediate cessation of violence. The military action being undertaken by Israel is ill-conceived and counter-productive, even taking into account its right to defend itself.
The civilian deaths are an outrage.
Yet Israel's capacity to wage this war seems more than matched by Hizbullah's capacity to fire rockets into Israel. One side, Hizbullah, seems to have done its strategic thinking. The other, Israel, has not. I suspect that had Ariel Sharon remained healthy this war would not be taking place.
That Hizbullah is delighted by the response it has drawn forth from Israel shows its indifference both to Lebanon and to ordinary citizens who want to get on with their day-to-day lives. That the West seems more intent on holding Israel responsible for this particular catastrophe is to ignore those who orchestrated it. Again, it needs to be restated: Israel's over-reaction cannot be allowed to obscure the actions and motives of a group whose world view is fundamentally hostile to all that progressives believe.
Finally, Michael D Higgins rails against the charge of anti-Americanism against those who hold his position. I understand his frustration. But when the deputy lord mayor of Dublin, a member of our party, was heard recently on the airwaves telling the elected governor of Florida to go home, is it any wonder that the charge is levelled against us? - Yours, etc,
Cllr AIDAN CULHANE,
Meadow Grove,
Dundrum,
Dublin 16.
Madam, - Stiofán Ó Cléirigh (August 7th) has completely misunderstood my grounds for criticising Martyn Turner's cartoon about the tragedy of Qana (August 4th).
I agree with Mr Ó Cléirigh that the cartoon tried to contrast Christ's gentle kindness to an embarrassed young couple on the occasion of their wedding with the brutality of the Israeli bombing of civilians in Qana. In this Martyn Turner's intentions were good and acceptable, however clumsy his attempt to express them.
The point of my objection was quite a different matter: the irreverent and near-blasphemous depiction of Christ as a figure of fun, gesturing in some kind of silly mumbo-jumbo over the water jars. - Yours, etc,
SEÁN MAC CÁRTHAIGH,
Ballsbridge,
Dublin 4.
Madam, - Louis Lentin (August 5th) castigates the Irish Film Institute for rejecting sponsorship from the Israeli embassy. I applaud the IFI.
Is Mr Lentin seriously suggesting that State-sponsored bodies should not make any moral judgment on their potential sponsors? Is he suggesting also that these bodies should not take into account the overwhelming views of their paymasters, namely the taxpayers of Ireland? - Yours, etc,
ALAN McPARTLAND,
Grange Court,
Rathfarnham,
Dublin 16.