Israeli raid on Gaza aid convoy

Madam, – We would like to add our voices to the many expressions of global condemnation at the Israeli occupying authority’s…

Madam, – We would like to add our voices to the many expressions of global condemnation at the Israeli occupying authority’s blatant act of aggression perpetrated under the guise of self-defence. This was a small unarmed and non-violent flotilla on a humanitarian mission to Gaza – a poverty-stricken area.

The manner in which this regime’s commandos boarded the aid-ship in international waters, under the cover of darkness, and caused so many fatalities, is a clear violation of human rights. The legality of its action must also be questioned by the United Nations Security Council and appropriate condemnations be given and, if warranted, sanctions imposed.

For the past three years, Gaza has been subjected to a siege, imposed on it by Israeli occupying authorities, which is highly questionable and controversial.

The Israeli regime has been responsible for the killing and displacement of Palestinian people over the past 60 years and also recent killing in the Gaza strip. It has fraudulently used the identities and passports of other countries to facilitate its terrorist activities and has refused to sign up to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

READ MORE

It is time for the international community to strongly and unequivocally condemn this act  and take action against  state terrorism.

What began as a mission of mercy has tragically ended in cold-blooded carnage. We extend our deepest sympathies to the bereaved families of those brave humanitarian activists. – Yours, etc,

FATEMEH ARDANEH,

Second Counsellor,

Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran,

Mount Merrion,

Blackrock, Co Dublin.

Madam, – In a few weeks or perhaps even days the righteous statements, angry words, staunch defences, facts and lies will all dissipate yet again and Israeli policy in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territories will not have changed in any meaningful way.

Israeli politicians and diplomats are hardened and experienced defenders of what they see as Israel’s interests. They know that all the words in the world by Micheál Martin, Brian Cowen or indeed Barack Obama are meaningless if they are not accompanied by action, and they will deftly play the word game until the media moves on to something else.

The situation is surely at the stage where our words need to be backed up by action. The least that the Irish Government can do is ban produce from illegal Israeli settlements from entering the Irish market. The Irish taxpayer and consumer might be surprised to know that Ireland supported the illegal Israeli settlement project by up to €40 million in 2008 via imports from illegal Israeli settlements! Unless we act, another victory for Israel’s brutal and illegal policies is on the horizon once again.

Has our sense of justice and willingness to act died with the Celtic Tiger? – Yours, etc,

JOE O’BRIEN,

Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel,

Mourne View,

Skerries, Co Dublin.

A chara, – Siege-mentality Israeli commandos besiege a flotilla of ships cruising towards Gaza, a landmass of 360 sq km (139 sq miles) populated by 1.5 million people, under Israeli blockade.

To besiege, to conquer by attrition or assault, stems from the Anglo-French for “to seat”. While this original meaning is now obsolete, sieges rarely sit well: Vienna 1529 and 1683, Derry 1689. Modern sieges are no better, the three-year siege of Gaza is second only to Sarajevo (1992-1996). A teenager in the Siege of Sarajevo asked if he had to sum up the worst thing about it responded: “The illusion that Europe/the world would help us, that was the hardest thing to accept. It took us two years to realise even though we were in the heart of Europe, an hour from Rome, 45 minutes from Munich, one hour from Athens, Europe did nothing. We got used to being shot at and going hungry. Once we realised we were on our own, we took two years to mobilise the offensive against the siege.”

Laying siege to a population hems in progressive policies; starves political alternatives and as the Sarajevo siege attests, provokes rather than placates. – Is mise,

Dr SHELLEY DEANE,

Assistant Professor of Government,

Bowdoin College,

Brunswick, Maine, US.

Madam, – Why does the UN not mandate Nato, which has the resources to do so, to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza to allow the convoy to deliver the relief supplies? It is the obvious action for the UN to take and the only response Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu will understand. – Yours, etc,

RICHARD REID,

Rathgar Avenue,

Dublin 6.

Madam, - Some of your correspondents are proposing a boycott of Israel over the latest incident involving lethal violence by Israeli soldiers against civilians. I would suggest that a strategy more likely to be effective in the short term would be to boycott US products until the US government agrees to attach conditions to its financial supports to the state of Israel, conditions designed to deter the Israeli government or defence forces from authorising the indiscriminate or disproportionate use of force against civilians in the future.

Doing without US products and services might be painful, but, if your Letters page is a reliable indicator, the Irish are ready to make this sacrifice. – Yours, etc,

EDWARD L BACH,

Belgrove Lawn,

Chapelizod,

Dublin 20.

Madam, – Most of your correspondents wrongly described the Israeli action to maintain its blockade of Gaza as piracy. It was of course an act of war, as noted by Dermot Sweeney (June 1st). But it was not a declaration of war on the rest of the world.

This act of war took place in the context of the Arab-Israeli war that has persisted for 62 years since the declarations of war by most Arab states in 1948 and which remain in force for all except Egypt and Jordan. It was an act of war because, since imposition of a blockade is itself an act of war, therefore attempts either to breach or enforce the blockade are equally acts of war.

Despite the purported humanitarian objectives of the convoy, its attempt to breach the blockade was an act of war. Since the passengers and crews of the ships were willing and active participants in a belligerent act they consequently relinquished the protections due to civilians and citizens of neutral countries under the laws of war and have no valid reason to complain about Israeli actions.

As a sovereign state in a formal state of declared war, Israel has legitimate authority to engage in acts of war to defend itself. On the other hand, the activists who organised and participated in the attempted breach of the blockade were engaging in an act of war at sea while not under the command of any military officer and therefore without legitimate sovereign authority. In this case, therefore, it is likely that piracy more accurately describes the activists’ actions than the Israelis’.

MICHAEL Mac GUINNESS,

Jenkinstown,

Co Louth.

Madam, – Ireland has historically chosen to minimise its response to Israel’s crimes against peoples, even when our own peacekeepers were among the victims. Now that Israel has sunk to the level of piracy and killing on the high seas, has the time not come to question how we benefit from an exchange of embassies? That state can treat us with insulting contempt as effectively from its home base as it can from Dublin 4. – Yours, etc,

HUGO BRADY BROWN,

Stratford on Slaney,

Co Wicklow.

Madam, – I notice that many of the letters you have received about the raid on the Gaza convoy are accusing Israel of engaging in piracy. Israel is currently maintaining a naval blockade of the Gaza coast in order to ensure that Hamas (a terrorist organisation, which is effectively in a state of war with Israel) cannot receive military supplies.

A naval blockade is a perfectly reasonable tactic in this situation. The last prominent example is probably the Nato blockade of Yugoslavia in the late 1990s. The aid convoy was attempting to breach this blockade. The parameters of the blockade were clearly transmitted to the convoy’s ships, and when they were advised to make for Ashdod to offload their supplies, the reply was “Negative, negative”.

This is a clear statement of intent to breach the blockade, and Israel acted accordingly. According to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, a neutral merchant ship may be attacked if it is believed to be breaching a blockade.

As for one of your correspondent’s suggestion to place a group of armed Irish commandos on board the Rachel Corrie, this would only strengthen Israel’s case for stopping her, as she would then be carrying armed military personnel. – Yours, etc,

LEO TALBOT,

Moy Glas Way,

Lucan, Co Dublin.

Madam, – Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the Israeli Defence Forces raid on the convoy en route to Gaza, it is interesting to see where the strongest calls for Palestinian support (and condemnation of Israel) are emanating from.

They are the same people who will try to have us vote “No” to every EU treaty, often quoting the need to protect our much cherished policy of neutrality. It would appear that their concept of neutrality doesn’t apply to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, so calls for boycotts, sanctions and expulsion of diplomats are acceptable when it comes to demonising Israel.

My dictionary defines neutrality somewhat differently to their dictionary, it would seem. – Yours, etc,

JOHN BARKER,

Watermill Road,

Raheny, Dublin 5.

Madam, – When I moved to Lebanon last August, I anticipated that Israel’s actions and foreign policy would have a greater impact on my existence than they ever had before. I knew their F-16s would violate the Lebanese airspace above my home, and I knew I would live with the ever present threat of a military offensive into Lebanon. However, I could not have anticipated that Israel’s actions would compromise the sovereignty of the state I’m from and, by extension, compromise my safety and liberty more by virtue of my carrying an Irish passport than by virtue of my being present in a state Israel bombed as recently as 2006.

I am Irish. Israel has violated the sovereignty of my nation. This violation has compromised both my security and freedom. These are facts. In March, Israel put me and my four million compatriots at risk of being detained by Interpol following its use of illegally forged Irish passports in the assassination of a Hamas leader in Dubai.

Any one of our passport numbers could have been involved, and until the Department of Foreign Affairs tracked down the citizens affected, we were all vulnerable when travelling through international airports. Moreover, as a resident of Lebanon, I was affected in the aftermath of the assassination by Lebanese immigration’s increased anxiety that European foreigners were potential spies and assassins. The integrity of each Irish passport presented at Beirut-Rafik Hariri International Airport is subject to question now, and that is a direct consequence of Israel’s actions.

Once again this week, Israel violated Irish sovereignty, this time by taking Irish citizens from a ship in international waters and detaining them in Israel. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Micheál Martin was correct to call this “kidnapping”.

I am an Irish citizen, yet Israel feels it has the right to steal my identity and to abduct me. This is unacceptable.

Until Israel issues an apology and shows itself capable of behaving within the parameters of international law, Ireland must take action. I call on Mr Martin to expel the Israeli ambassador, halt the issue of travel visas to Israeli citizens, and block the importation of goods and services from Israel. – Yours, etc,

NIAMH FLEMING-FARRELL,

Adma,

Lebanon.