MICHAEL FARRELL,
Madam, - Article 29. 2 of the Irish Constitution affirms the State's "adherence to the principle of the pacific settlement of international disputes. . ."
The preamble to the Good Friday Agreement states the "total and absolute commitment" of the parties involved, including the Irish and British Governments, "to exclusively democratic and peaceful means of resolving differences on political issues and our opposition to any use or threat of force by others for any political purpose. . ."
International law does not allow pre-emptive attacks on other states, however much we may dislike their regimes, and any use of force, even in self-defence, must be proportionate. It must not cause more loss of life or destruction than it is intended to prevent. By all these standards there is no justification for the threatened war.
Saddam Hussein is a brutal tyrant and we should all welcome his removal - by his own people. But he does not pose an imminent threat even to his neighbours, much less the United States. And the current regime of weapons inspections and now overflights by U2 spy planes makes it effectively impossible for him to use chemical or biological weapons.
Our Government should be working to strengthen the weapons inspection teams and include human rights inspectors as well, instead of supporting a US government that seems determined to attack Iraq regardless of what the UN or anyone else says. The Government should be co-operating with our European partners to develop an alternative to the Bush-Blair war policy.
It is not anti-American to oppose the adventurism of the Bush government. It is in the longer-term interests of the US people themselves to do so. - Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL FARRELL, Monaloe Avenue, Blackrock, Co Dublin.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Madam, - One wonders if the Saturday marchers in any one stream of the current confluence of sub-agendas that are subsumed under the "No to War" banner read your balanced and logical editorial of Friday, February 15th.
In the current debate it is difficult to avoid the temptation of argumentum ad hominem because of the dangerous mixture of ignorance and anarchy that constitutes the anti-war campaign. Least worrying are the "activists/campers". They take up "causes" like children choose toys, and, if ignored, throw tantrums and cause damage to get the attention they crave.
Much more worrying is that their anarchy is outrageously encouraged by a small group in the Dáil, including one who seems to believe that socialism is a new idea whose day has come, by Sinn Féin democratic anti-militarists and a few Green men behaving badly. In support, in the "intellectual" corner of the media we have commentators "exposing" the "secret and unconstitutional" activity at Shannon, which was demonstrably neither.
Ireland voted with the UN Security Council to apply pressure to Saddam after 11 years of defiance. That pressure had to be made visible and credible. We had no option but to allow other members of the UN to move troops to be in a position to demonstrate the seriousness of the threat, until the situation could be moved forward by another resolution. Other "experts" posed silly questions such as: "If Iraq were a banana republic would we be concerned about it?" The obvious answer is "No", because then Iraq would not have the wealth to pose a threat with weapons of mass destruction.
Add in a quiver of men on the verge of hysteria shaking with righteous fury on TV. Their case, high on emotion, low on logic, rests on the danger to innocent Iraqis. Sadly, there are innocent people in danger in all wars. A just and necessary war, such as that for the freedom of Europe against Hitler, could have been declared only against the sovereign state of Germany, in which there were innocent people, not simply against the Nazi government. One such family, relations of the writer's wife, had branches on both sides.
The shallow and simplistic position of the "campaigners" stands in contrast to your Editorial of February 15th and to the position of the rest of us, who, sincerely hope there will be no war, but still wrestle with the complexities of the situation. Do we face the possibility of some action now on limited intelligence or live to regret our appeasement? It is truly astonishing how many people seem to think that 100 per cent intelligence is not only possible but essential. Clinton, who did great work for Ireland, unfortunately let al-Qaeda slip as he waited for certainty, which arrived with a bang on 9/11.
The heart-warming sight of children with "No" placards is simply that, heart-warming. Real peace can come only when international organisations such as the UN and the EU speak as one and not in pursuit of local political agendas. Do "peace marchers" consider the effect on the morale of the troops, including a battalion of the Royal Irish Regiment from the North of Ireland who may be faced with putting their lives on the line for us if war proves necessary?
The key to progress is the pressure currently being put on Saddam. The French government's démarche, even if it is a product of Gaullist resentment of anglophone solidarity, may indeed offer a possible way forward but risks reducing that pressure. Conflicting signals suit a bully whose dearest wish is to defy the world as the mother of all heroes, preferably on TV.
Tom Kettle, a constitutional nationalist who died for Ireland and Europe, wrote: "War is hell, but it is a hell of suffering, not a hell of dishonour." The most encouraging aspect of this emotionally muddied scene is the Minister for Foreign Affairs maintaining his awareness of our international obligations, while, once again, "wild men scream in the keyhole". - Yours, etc.,
P.D.GOGGIN, Glenageary Woods, Co Dublin.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Madam, - Jack Fairweather writes lucidly of present-day Kuwait ("Camel-drivers head south to Saudi border", The Irish Times, February 7th). He describes the plight of the Bedouin, who have lost their seasonal grazing grounds through the enlargement of the US military zone to cover two-thirds of Kuwait's land mass.
The Bedouin hope to enter Saudi Arabia, but the fate of the cheaply-hired Bangladeshi and Pakistani workers must, I think, be very uncertain.
Modern warfare has another factor that restricts land use. This is the danger of radiation caused by depleted uranium bullets. These were used by the US forces during the Gulf War.
During a visit to Kuwait eight years after that war, while driving in an air-conditioned car, we passed a notice saying "Danger of Radiation" and were cautioned not to open the windows. We followed the track of compacted sand, which was overlaid with pale, unstable surface sands, almost white in the sunlight. These rise in a localised sandstorm after the quick passage of a car or a gust of wind. The effect resembles Wicklow mountain mist and the fine-grained particle are no doubt easily inhaled.
Among all this, in and around the radioactive debris of a damaged war bunker, children of the Bedouin and emigrant workers played. - Yours, etc.,
CAMILLE SOUTER, (Member of Aosdána), Achill Island, Co Mayo.
... ... * ... * ... * ... ...
Madam, - The photograph in your edition of February 18th of around 30 top Iraqi military officers explains why there has been no coup against Saddam. The officers are quite obviously some of the identical clones of the dictator which his laboratories have been producing for years. - Yours, etc.,
PETER EVANS, Percy Place, Dublin 4.