LETTERS: Human rights, British politicians and the European Court
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr Gerard Feehily
Sir: Tim Willcocks (letter, 30 September), in his assertion that IRA members had to "be prepared for the consequences" of fighting a war with Britain, is either being extremely naive or wilful.
Never in the 25 years of the conflict did the British army or successive governments ever make clear to the broader public that they were fighting a "terrible and unnecessary war". Rather, they claimed to be neutral arbiters in an age-old conflict between Northern Irish nationalists and loyalists. Any other claim would have undermined Britain's argument for keeping troops in the province; and, since 1994, would have undermined its status as guarantor of the peace process.
It is only in this context that the British government's hostility to the European ruling becomes clear. If the SAS did unlawfully kill three "unfortunate" members of the IRA, how does this square with Britain's supposed role?
To imply, as Mr Willcocks does, that the Gibraltar Three were casualties of war is to imply that the army and the IRA were equal belligerents. This also suggests that the IRA was not a terrorist organisation, but an army with legitimate goals. It would be most surprising if any member of the Government or the British army were to come out publicly and agree with him.
Yours,
Gerard Feehily
Paris
30 September
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments