Sir, Congratulations to The Irish Times for its generally fairminded coverage of events in Lebanon. But why is other coverage of current Israeli policy in Lebanon, so biased?
South Lebanon has been occupied since 1978 by a particularly brutal foreign army (not the only brutal one - the Syrians, elements of the PLO and parts of the Lebanese army have not covered themselves in glory either) which has not hesitated to set up its own local militia there to carry out its wishes. On occasion this has led to the harassment and even murder of UNIFIL troop's, including Irish soldiers such as Privates Smallhorne and Barrett (have they been forgotten?) whose only "crime" was to carry out the UN mandate and to protect the local population from the worst effects of occupation. Ordinary Lebanese people have experienced humiliation, intimidation, arbitrary shelling, the dynamiting of houses and the destruction of orchards and other sources of livelihood, internment, torture and death.
Now we have the clearing of an entire region, by force. Imagine if everyone in Munster was ordered to leave their homes within four hours and told that after that time they would be regarded as "terrorists" and a legitimate target for the helicopter gunships and tanks. On top of that, Ballymun is attacked by a foreign air force which pauses on the way to destroy the ESB station at Poulaphouca. Is this not terrorism?
The outstanding feature of Israeli policy (apart from stupidity and moral bankruptcy) is the sheer disproportionality of it.
There is much knowledgeable talk, particularly by visiting green horn television reporters, of Katyusha rockets. In fact, they are peashooters; clumsy, inaccurate and incapable of inflicting significant damage. Far more deadly and modern Israeli weapons have been used against the civilians of South Lebanon, and far more Lebanese have died, than has been the case with the citizens of northern Israel. Why do we not hear about them? Have they no names, no history, no sisters, brothers, parents, spouses? Why, in addition, do we not hear the background story? The reality is not one of "unprovoked" attacks by Hizbullah against innocent Israeli civilians; it is one of an ongoing military occupation by Israel and its stooges. Thus, the present sequence of events began with yet another breach by Israel of an informal agreement between themselves and Hizbullah and the killing of a Lebanese citizen.
RTE's Morning Ireland recently referred to "pro Iranian Hizbullah militiamen" and "Islamic extremists" in describing the guerrillas in South Lebanon. To be charitable, this is lazy journalism. The terms "Islamic" and "extremist" seem to go together like love and marriage and a horse and carriage, as the song put it; how would Irish Catholics feel if "Catholic" was always accompanied by "fascist"?
Hizbullah is a social, economic and cultural movement; for the most part. I do not agree with its religious objectives, but it provides health, education and welfare services as well as religious and moral support to people who have been let down by everyone else, from the central government in Beirut to the international community (except for UNIFIL, of which we may be justly proud). These people were mostly apolitical and had no historical quarrel with Israel they opposed the PLO in the past, when the latter threatened to drag South Lebanon into a broader conflict. Many support Hizbullah because it is the only effective resistance movement in an occupied area fighting for its own survival against all the odds.
We should be careful about the language we use and sceptical about the reports we receive, from whatever quarter. I lived in Lebanon from 1982-85 and visited South Lebanon on many occasions. - Yours, etc.,
Model Farm Road,
Cork.