An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth will never bring peace to anyone

Letters to the editor: our readers share their views. Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

An Israeli bombardment caused damage on al-Rashid street in Gaza City (AP)

It seems to be impossible to comment on the Israeli-Hamas conflict without incurring someone’s wrath.

Rishi Sunak has asserted that the missile that hit the al-Ahli hospital came from within Gaza. Those within Gaza say they simply do not have that level of firepower. While we debate responsibility, we lose sight of the fact that some 470 civilians were murdered. It’s not their war and they were in hospital.

Sunak also said that Israel has “a right and duty” to go after Hamas. “Duty” sounds like a call to arms and I politely question that. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth will never bring peace to anyone.

Few would disagree with the granting of land to the state of Israel in 1948. The six-day war in 1967 allowed Israel to steal land not previously granted to them. They have continued to encroach on Palestinian land to this day. This is challenging but remains unchallenged by the West.

However, while it may explain the rise of Hamas, it certainly does not excuse their actions. There are many Israelis who support Palestinians and their claim to their own territory. There are many Palestinians who oppose Hamas and their terrorist activities. And yet the debate seems to be reduced to whether one is antisemitic or not.

It must surely be possible to be sympathetic towards Palestinians while not being antisemitic? How on earth do we move on from this ghastly impasse?

Beryl Wall

London

A Liz Truss tribute act

So, Sunak has been in power for a year and even taking into account the Truss financial crash, we are all no better off. Inflation is still high despite Sunak’s promise to halve it, growth is static, debt is going up, and NHS waiting lists are out of control. Sleaze is still around too. Remember Boris Johnson, Gavin Williamson, Dominic Raab, or Nadhim Zahawi?

As for levelling up, just who gave the Tories the right to turn funding for an HS2 link into a Tory election treasure chest?

Meanwhile, the Tories remain roughly 20 points behind Labour without yet factoring in the scrapping of bankers bonuses. Yet still, it is clearer than ever before that the Tories only care about the richest one per cent at the expense of the rest.

Barely any change has happened under Sunak which can only make him a Liz Truss tribute act.

Truss saw the Tories sink to 26 points behind Labour in the polls and a year later, the Tories remain 20 points behind Labour under Sunak. This tells me that the damage to this government is done and that Labour just needs to keep their heads, stick to the centre ground, and a return to power awaits.

Geoffrey Brooking

Havant

Revealed truth

The Israeli religious right’s obsession with history is clearly selective (Israel has said the “time has come to teach the United Nations a lesson”). They cite biblical times to justify their stance towards Palestinians, yet claim to be unable to see the fundamental truth revealed from more recent times by UN chief Antonio Guterres: if one oppresses any nation long enough, and denies them all means of redress they will sooner or later inevitably rise.

Other Israelis display a compassion and wisdom that are humbling – the peace activists sticking to their principles, B’Tselem in Israel, Na’amod here. It’s them to whom we must listen more, not those politicians seeking to cover up their own failings and omissions.

Those who shout the loudest have the most to cover up.

Peter Millen

Huddersfield

Doffing their cap

The government’s mantra has been that even modest pay increases in the public sector cannot be given because they would be inflationary. How then can Sunak justify his plan to scrap the cap on bankers’ bonuses? Isn’t that inflationary as well? Or is it, once again, a case of one rule applying to wealthy Tory supporters and another to the rest of us?

Peter Coggins

Oxford

Law and disorder

I read your editorial (“Being ‘tough on crime’ is impossible when there is no functioning justice system”) with interest and yes it is correct to state that many people in this country will not be up close and personal with its terminal decline.

But yet again another vital service has been decimated and the government will no doubt, in the torturously long run-up to the general election, be banging the law and order drum to extinction.

How has this country come to this? When justice meted out to victims takes forever and many years to achieve. I also read Peter Collier’s detailed account of where and how it has all gone so disastrously wrong, and it must be so demoralising for these once-so-valued judges and legal staff to witness the continuing and ongoing implosion.

Judith A. Daniels

Norfolk

A princely sum

You don’t have to be a professor of logic to see a flaw in the Buckingham Palace statement regarding Anthony Pratt’s donations to King Charles when Charles was the Prince of Wales. It certainly does not automatically follow from the fact that Pratt is a big philanthropist that his donations were therefore to support the former Prince’s charitable organisations.

As with so much of the concern around the monarch’s finances, a great deal more transparency is needed.

Andrew McLuskey

Address supplied