If Israel retaliates, will we step in to protect innocent Iranians?

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

Israel’s anti-missile system responds to the approach of drones and missiles launched by Iran (Reuters)

Nearly all of Iran’s projectiles aimed at Israel last weekend were intercepted, many by the US, UK, France and Jordan. That was necessary for the protection of innocent civilians. If Israel were now to retaliate in kind, would not a similar action be required to protect the blameless civilians of Iran, many of whom do not support the Iranian regime?

Even Israel’s staunchest allies have recently baulked at its continuing assault on the starving children of Gaza. Defending a country does not equate to supporting its attack on another, in a way that would contravene international law.

Benjamin Netanyahu must be assured that, though his country has allies who will gladly go to its defence, they will not tolerate wanton attacks on innocents, such as he has perpetrated on the Palestinians. Nor would the world look kindly on a nuclear threat by Israel, or its assault on any nuclear installation in Iran.

Susan Alexander

South Gloucestershire

What makes Israel so special?

The world condemns Iran for its fruitless, attempted show of strength against Israel, which is continuing a brutal occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, and which has resulted in many tens of thousands of deaths – mostly innocent women and children.

But we allow Israel to continue the occupation. We allow Israel to attack the sovereign territory of Iran without admission. We allow Israel to hold a nuclear arsenal without admission. We allow Israel to neither confirm or deny acts of aggression and killing.

What makes Israel so special, that it can blatantly confound international efforts to provide a Palestinian state, yet we scramble to join their fight? We urge Israel to exercise restraint. When will the West learn?

And, to paraphrase Monty Python, what did the Israelis ever do for us?

Dave Hill

Waterlooville

Turn over a new leaf

Winston Churchill is recorded as saying, quite rightly, that “meeting jaw to jaw is better than war”. Given the ongoing tragedy in Gaza, and the recent attack on Israel, it is clear that we now need a peace conference to address the issues at stake.

However, the “jawing” will need to be based on a clear understanding of the hopes of those involved. It would be good, therefore, if the governments of Israel and Iran – along with the Palestinian Authority – could each state their aims on one side of A4. We could then see if there is any chance of agreement.

Andrew McLuskey

Address supplied

The problem and not the solution

I read Zoe Grunewald’s report – “Rwanda flights to take off ‘within weeks’, health secretary claims” (Your View, yesterday) – with interest and a deficit of agreement. Especially now, when the situation between Iran and Israel is being ratcheted up to very dangerous levels.

I would surmise that Britain, and the world at large, have far more important matters on their hands than a basically unworkable, expensive and morally redundant policy. Additionally, the Rwanda state airline do not want to transport asylum seekers to their country, which probably speaks volumes!

As for departing the ECHR, again, this is a step too far and one that would not sit at all well with the moderate element of Conservative MPs.

Now would be the time to ditch this policy, because its deterrent factor for desperate people has not been proved or established to any great degree. The provision of safe and legal routes is the only real answer to an intractable problem, which goes to prove that the government is really only interested in the problem and not the solution.

They surmise that talking tough about a disenfranchised demographic is a proven vote winner – I would beg to differ. The majority of the public want sustainable and fair outcomes, not gimmicks.

Judith A. Daniels

Norfolk

There goes the neighbourhood

At the insistence of Tories, the police are investigating the possibility that Angela Rayner may have inadvertently given false information about where she once lived, which she denies.

Yet nobody seems to be concerned about Lord Ashcroft and Akshata Murty declaring they didn’t consider their main domicile to be the UK – the latter while living with her husband as chancellor and then PM, with her children at UK schools.

Geoff Forward

Stirling

Last orders

On Monday 1 April, Israel bombed Iran’s consulate complex next to its embassy in Syria, killing seven Iranian officials and six Syrian citizens.

For six months, Western leaders have excused Israel’s killings in Gaza, which, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, has claimed the lives of more than 33,000 Palestinians – which is some 10,000 deaths after South Africa brought its case of genocide. The Western leaders’ defence has been that Israel has a “right” to defend itself.

Yet those Western leaders deny Iran the same “right” of defence, when it has responded to the attack on its embassy by launching 200 drones and missiles against Israel.

For its part, Israel – having spent the last six months ignoring and insulting the UN, and denouncing resolutions condemning its brutality in Gaza as “antisemitic” – is now calling for a UN emergency meeting over Iran’s attack.

In my view, Israel – with the backing of Joe Biden, Rishi Sunak, David Cameron, Ursula von der Leyen and most of the leadership of the Western world – has spent the last six months violating international law with impunity. Now it expects Iran to comply with UN pronouncements.

It’s too late to appeal to a “rule-based international order”.

Sasha Simic

London