Madam, - The failure of the United States administration or any of the other G8 countries publicly to condemn Israel for its war crime of collective punishments against Lebanese and Palestinian civilians is a disgrace.
In recent weeks more than 200 innocent Lebanese and Palestinian men, women and children have been slaughtered by the Israeli military, as part of its policy of collective punishment following the capture of three of its soldiers by Hizbullah. Israel has deliberately attacked civilian objects throughout Lebanon, including Beirut international airport, numerous bridges and petrol stations, a lighthouse and an electricity power station. It is a similar story in the Palestinian Gaza Strip, where Gaza international airport lies in ruins following repeated Israeli attacks, and there are serious power and water shortages after Israel bombed the only electricity plant.
Under the 1949 Geneva Conventions collective punishments are a war crime. Article 33 of the Convention states: "No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed" and "collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited." Article 147 outlaws "extensive destruction ... not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly".
In addition, Protocol 1 of the Geneva Conventions states: "In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operation only against military objectives."
That failure of the United States to uphold international law and condemn Israel's war crimes shows once again that when it comes to the Middle East, the Bush administration is incapable of being even-handed with the countries and peoples involved. Instead of being potentially part of the solution to the Middle East conflict; the US, with its blind support for Israel, is actually part of the problem. - Yours, etc,
MAIRTÁN Ó GLIOSÁIN,
Athenry,
Co Galway.
****
Madam, - As I put my 15-month-old son to bed last night, I thought of parents trying to do the same but under threat of Israeli smart bomb or Hizbullah rocket.
And while I agree with the right of any country to defend itself against outside attack, the continued targeting of Lebanese infrastructure and civilians is a war crime which we should not refrain from criticising. Is the irony of men, women and children fleeing their homes under aerial bombardment somehow lost on the government of Israel? - Yours, etc,
D.M. MORIARTY,
Knocklyon,
Dublin 16.
****
Madam, - Senator David Norris's hamfisted attempt (July 18th) to equate the Israelis' actions in Lebanon with those of the Nazis is crass in the extreme. His reference to the "right" of Lebanese and Palestinian civilians to be "incinerated in the Israeli blitzkrieg" is an absolute disgrace. Shame on you, Senator Norris. - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN McMAHON,
Naas,
Co Kildare.
****
Madam, - I am not a military tactician; I know nothing of warfare; I have never held a gun in my life. How, then, can I know that the Israeli strategy - the eradication of Hizbullah - is not going to work when the finest minds of the IDF insist that it will? Maybe I'm missing something. Or maybe they are: intelligence, perhaps?
The only thing that will work in this situation is justice in the form of a viable state for the people of Palestine. Does Israel not understand the nature of justice? And do the democracies of the West, especially the US, not understand that their continuing support for, or acceptance of, a palpable injustice puts the peace of most of the globe at risk? - Yours, etc,
JOSEPH McDONNELL,
Woodlawn Park,
Dublin 14.
****
Madam, - In the second World War, the total number of German dead represented 10.82 per cent of the population, and the Japanese rate was 3.61 per cent, but the UK lost 0.94 per cent and the US 0.32 per cent. Were the Allied defenders of freedom therefore "disproportionate"? What moral or military or historical logic suggests to Chirac and Putin that Israel is "disproportionate"? Since when is the aggressor entitled to suffer only the same losses as the defender? Did De Gaulle or Stalin make that complaint in, or after, the second World War?
A just war is not for revenge or reprisal, but to eliminate a deadly threat. The fanatical jihadi fringe is such a threat, and to other Arabs and Muslims as well. The "proportionate" casualties they take are whatever it takes to conquer them thoroughly, and remove their aggressive capacity for good.
My hopes and prayers are with the "armed democrats" of the IDF, on land, sea and air, on whose courage, determination, and skills not only the people of Israel depend, but all those who are, or who seek to be, truly free, including the majority in Lebanon. - Yours, etc,
TOM CAREW,
Ranelagh,
Dublin, 6.
****
Madam, - Charles Krauthammer asserts (Opinion, July 17th) that the actions of the Palestinians before 1967 indicate that the sought return of the occupied territories is merely a smokescreen masking their real intentions. This is as illogical as suggesting that the Irish Government's acceptance of a majority decision on the future status of Northern Ireland is hollow because the 1937 Constitution claimed sovereignty over the entire island.
Times change, situations change, people's views change; to believe otherwise is to consign the world to a never-ending cycle of strife. - Yours, etc,
JACK HICKEY,
Dalkey,
Co Dublin.