MB Civic

To the Editor:

Re “More Than a Cease-Fire Needed” (editorial, July 21):

How do we enlist the United States in any peace process that involves Arab countries when our unconditional support for Israel makes us suspect from the start?

The proposal for peacekeeping troops to enforce a cease-fire will die aborning, since Israel has consistently rejected any suggestion of an international force on its borders.

There should first be a Security Council resolution calling for an end to indiscriminate shelling of civilian targets in Lebanon and a cessation of Hezbollah shelling of northern Israel.

If and when such a cease-fire is attained, peace talks may begin. Such talks should be comprehensive, and aggressive attention should be given to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

These talks must be all-inclusive, with Hamas and Hezbollah as participants, regardless of American objections.

Leonard Amada
Whiting, N.J., July 21, 2006

•

To the Editor:

It’s clear that you see Hezbollah as the leading agent in the hostilities now raging in the Middle East. But Hezbollah and Hamas were both formed in response to the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.

If you call for a return of Israeli soldiers without asking anything of the Israelis in return, for example the release of children and women held in Israeli prisons, then nothing will have been achieved.

Kathleen Hill
New York, July 21, 2006

•

To the Editor:

Do you really think that the international community, by words or resolutions, can force Hezbollah to disband its militia?

Hezbollah and organizations like it will disband only when they are destroyed. It’s the same in Iraq. These organizations are committed to one thing: the destruction of Israel and the United States.

Israel is showing the world what can and will happen if these organizations continue unfettered. The world needs to wake up and take these organizations out, once and for all, lest we be fearful of them for the rest of our lives.

Bret P. Wallach
Hicksville, N.Y., July 21, 2006

•

To the Editor:

It is certainly true that the people of Lebanon and Israel need more than a cease-fire. Although the recent provocation of the Israeli war machine was uncalled for, Israel since 1967 has violated the Lebanese airspace and waterways and has invaded the country at will.

Any international force that may become involved should deploy on both sides of the border to protect the Israelis from rockets and the Lebanese from the Israeli firepower. It should have the authority to stop Israel’s violation of Lebanese airspace and prevent Israeli forces from invading Lebanon again.

Reconstruction and compensation issues should be addressed as part of any deal, or forces unfriendly to the United States will offer the help in exchange for political influence.

Lebanon will need a Marshall Plan to rebuild, with guarantees this time that it will not be victimized again.

Wael A. Jaber
Shaker Heights, Ohio, July 21, 2006

•

To the Editor:

The principle of proportionality in international law is not a formula whereby there should be one dead Lebanese for every dead Israeli.

Proportionality means that the destruction caused by military force must be outweighed by the good it will accomplish; one cannot use more force than necessary to achieve one’s objectives.

The high number of civilians killed by Israeli forces is disproportionate, not to the number of Israeli victims of Hezbollah’s rockets, but to the goals Israel claims it is trying to achieve in Lebanon.

If anything, the devastation and the high body count are making Hezbollah’s anti-Israeli arguments more plausible to the many Lebanese affected by Israel’s wide-ranging attacks.

Max Paul Friedman
Bochum, Germany, July 21, 2006
The writer is a professor of history at Florida State University.