Beware the distracting charge of equivalence

Beware the distracting charge of equivalence

Sean Kelly (‘‘The rule of law must apply to all’’, May 27) puts it very well when, with regard to the International Criminal Court’s application for arrest warrants for leading Hamas figures and Israeli leaders, he states that ‘‘international law is important and should apply to all’’. The charge of equivalence levelled by US President Joe Biden and echoed by many others is another example of the tactics of distraction and misinformation used to undermine valid criticism of Israel’s excessive retaliation and brutality in its response to the attacks of October 7. Rhetoric aside, the ICC has levelled individual and distinct charges against both parties to the conflict. These charges are based upon sound legal consideration of strong prima facie evidence of criminal conduct. To dismiss or label them as equivalence is an attack on the basic precepts of international law and justice. Our government should stand firm in supporting the international legal process against the partisan attacks of Israel’s apologists.

Lindsay Smith, Linden

Israel and Hamas may not be equivalent, but their actions may be. Hamas clearly targeted Israeli civilians on October 7. And, despite its claims to the contrary, Israel has used the suffering of Gazan civilians in its subsequent fight against Hamas. It would seem that drawing equivalence is now a separate, and bigger, crime than inflicting pain and suffering on innocents. And the ICC would have been criticised whatever it did. If the ICC had separated the two accusations and focused on just one of them, you can bet that those who support the accused side would claim bias amid cries of ‘‘but, what about what they did?’’ More broadly, however, this is what politicians do all the time. The suffering of others may well be of concern. But it is secondary. It is a hook to enable them to make a political point against their opponents. It is about time that they focused on what’s important – in this case, the suffering, not the equivalence.

David Rush, Lawson

As emphasised by Sean Kelly, the decision of the ICC to apply for arrest warrants for leaders of both Israel and Hamas is a matter of international humanitarian law and the international rules of armed conflict. Whatever happened to the concept of allowing the legal process to take its course? Let’s leave it to the court to decide the validity of claims and counter claims, to determine and assess the facts, and to judge the innocence, guilt or relative culpability of those indicted.

Meredith Williams, Baulkham Hills

Thank you, Sean Kelly, for calling out the ‘‘no equivalence’’ argument about the Israel-Gaza conflict. It is a distraction, and the deliberations by international courts seem little more than a sideshow.

Hard to see that tallying up atrocities on both sides serves anyone, least of all the thousands of grieving families, when neither side is yet willing to cease hostilities. The conflict must end before any day of reckoning, but that day will come.

Margaret Johnston, Paddington

Almost everything Sean Kelly argues about the fraught state of the Middle East has been said frequently by Herald letter writers.

Ron Sinclair, Windradyne