Madam, - Your Editorial of December 24th, referring to a recent RTÉ documentary on the situation in the Holy Land, associates me with the claim that Israel's security barrier is a "land grab". I said nothing of the sort. In my opinion, not only is that a wilfully false interpretation, but it is not born out by the historical facts.
Those who remember the events during the second Intifada will recall the enormous public pressure from Israelis to build such a barrier to protect them against the carnage in their cities wreaked by murderous Palestinian suicide bombers. The proposal for this move in the Israeli parliament was actually made by the opposition Labour Party.
The then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and his right-wing government strongly resisted this call. Why? Precisely because they understood that any kind of demarcation line of the western periphery of the West Bank would in effect lay down the line of an eventual border between Israel and a Palestinian state and they did not want to encourage any such premature action - especially as there were and still are those (a minority, granted - but a vociferous one) who believe that control of the West Bank is essential for Israel's regional security.
It was only when the public pressure became too much to bear that the then government of Israel went ahead with building a security barrier. Thus, if anything, it would be more correct to describe the barrier as a land relinquishment - something which I personally believe will be to the ultimate benefit of both Israelis and Palestinians as it psychologically prepares the way for the separation desired, ironically, by the majority of both peoples, but prevented by violent extremists whom the Palestinian leadership has been unable or unwilling to control.
This is not to say that everything about the security barrier is acceptable to me. I did say to Roisin Duffy and Felicity Heathcote that many of us are unhappy with the route the wall takes, specifically in Jerusalem, and I applauded the Israeli Supreme Court for its decisions changing the route of the security barrier elsewhere to take the needs of Palestinian farmers into consideration. Similar such petitions - mostly from Israeli organisations - are still before the Courts.
Nevertheless the statistics are categorical: the wall has proved its security value beyond doubt and Israel's first duty is to protect the lives of its citizens. - Yours, etc,
DAVID ROSEN, (Former Chief Rabbi of Ireland, Jerusalem).
Madam, - Dermot Meleady (December 24th) correctly asserts that the West Bank fence/wall has succeeded in preventing suicide bombers from taking the lives of Israeli citizens. However, some additional context should be provided to illustrate the full impact of the structure.
Israeli has a right, indeed an obligation, to protect its citizens from such attacks, but the severity of its security policies to this end give grave cause for concern. The fence/wall would have been equally effective for the purpose of stopping suicide bombings if it had been built along the "Green Line" (the 1949 armistice line separating Israel from the West Bank) rather than deep inside the West Bank on Palestinian land, as 80 per cent of it is.
Its route has caused significant hardship for those Palestinians unfortunate enough to live close to the structure or on its western side. Tens of thousands of olive trees and many areas of fertile agricultural land have been destroyed, dozens of homes have been demolished and tens of thousands of Palestinians have been cut off from their land, with a direct impact on their ability to earn a basic living. Palestinian families are cut off from each other and their land, and their access to education and health care facilities is severely hindered.
Rather than following the "Green Line", avoiding such humanitarian ill-effects, the route was designed to encompass more than 50 Israeli settlements, where some 80 per cent of Israeli settlers live, and large areas around them. This provides territorial contiguity with Israel for the settlements, which are illegal under international law, and cuts them off from the rest of the West Bank.
Construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank should be stopped immediately, and existing sections not on the "Green Line" should be dismantled. - Yours, etc,
DAVID WHITE, Stonebridge Avenue, Clonsilla, Dublin 15.