Sir, - If Paul Gillespie and Richard Sinnott look again at page 9 of your edition of May 19th (provincial edition) they will see that what I quoted is what The Irish Times printed. It is of course conceivable, though unlikely, that the Dublin edition included the words "or that Ireland should negotiate an opt-out from participating in the Rapid Reaction Force".
Mr Gillespie and Prof Sinnott state: "The actual debate focuses on intervention in humanitarian crises such as those that arose in the Balkans." Repeatedly the word "humanitarian" is being used in this campaign to fudge the Rapid Reaction Force issue. The recent Balkan crises were not primarily "humanitarian", arising from floods, famine, earthquake. They were military: Serbs fighting Croats and Bosnians, Croats fighting Bosnians and so on - and on. In Bosnia the UN Protection Force was prevented by its mandate from intervening militarily to save Bosnian lives. Its commanders frequently made it clear that their first duty was to protect UNPROFOR lives. Do Mr Gillespie and Prof Sinnott really believe that had the Rapid Reaction Force existed in 1992, the British, French, Dutch, Spanish - and etc. - governments would have been willing to "take casualties" to save Balkan lives?
The Balkan wars were designed to uproot and dispossess millions of innocent civilians who then needed humanitarian aid and UNPROFOR's mandate was to protect aid convoys - which it frequently failed to do. Much food aid went to sustain the various armies - thereby, it is arguable, prolonging the war. Several Serbs, Bosnians and Croats pointed out to me that had the "international community" not provided food aid, the Serbs, Bosnians and Croats would have been regularly selling food to their "enemies; because "no on starves in modern Europe" and that's how the Balkan cookie crumbles. When the Croatian and Bosnian armies were fighting, Croatian arms dealers sold weaponry to the Bosnians.
As for the terms "peace-making" and "peace-enforcing", the brutal truth is that most armies exist - are equipped and trained - to make war, not peace. And when it suits their governments not to make war, as in Bosnia, they sit on the fence, well-equipped and well trained, and literally watch people being slaughtered. The Irish Army's honourable reputation as a peacekeeper was linked to its not being equipped to make war, not being allied to NATO. - Yours, etc.,
Dervla Murphy, Lismore, Co Waterford.
The question Ms Murphy refers to was put to poll respondents in its full form, but was abbreviated in editing for our report. The opt- out response was, however, identified in the accompanying graphic, showing that 29 per cent thought the Government should negotiate an opt-out from the Rapid Reaction Force. - Ed., IT.