Sir - Justin Kilcullen has called for stricter control by the European Union on the sale of small arms to conflict zones (May 12th). The Director of Trocaire has urged us to lobby our prospective MEPs to limit brokering and licensed production of these weapons.
My experience and logic question this demand. I lay hidden in helpless terror from gunfire and grenades during a Khmer Rouge raid. My life hung on the courage of a local militia and a few terrified towns-people with rifles. With other Aid workers I fled to the UN military. The French Legionnaires never left their compound. Their UN mandate forbade any intervention. Local people protected their homes and families.
Evil preys on the defenceless. In Rwanda, gangs slaughtered their neighbours with machetes as small arms were in short supply. Guns are neutral. They can defend or terrorise the innocent. Hatred and greed will always find tools.
When threatened by official or unofficial thugs, what can victims do? Unarmed, should they trust in some international force? On a recent trip to the Balkans I was asked how many dead bodies does it take for democratic Europe to intervene. A mere trickle of blood is ignored. Is one million refugees enough to justify UN peacekeeping? Meanwhile, the Congo writhes in another forgotten agony.
Should our European neighbours decide how many rifles, if any, the Army and Garda should hold to prevent terrorism here, an obvious area of conflict? Strict EU controls will force frustrated shoppers to go elsewhere. Sophisticated western small arms are exported for profit in a competitive market. Other less democratic states donate weapons to support business and political interests.
Small arms threaten and kill; they can protect or destroy. It all depends on who wields them and why. There are no simple solutions to weapons and war. - Yours, etc., John Kavanagh,
Tipperary Town.