The carnage in Paris, like 9/11, was a crime, not an act of war, and responding to it by yet more bombing of Syria will only beget more violence in response. Isis will only be finally defeated ideologically. The vast majority of Muslims, who are just as horrified as everyone else, are the only ones who can achieve that.
Rather than trying to kill Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and other known leaders, indict them for crimes against humanity and set up an international tribunal to try them, in absentia, if necessary.
Use Muslim lawyers and Muslim clerics to make the case and broadcast it worldwide. In parallel, diplomatic efforts to achieve a ceasefire in Syria must be stepped up, giving full support to UN special envoy Staffan de Mistura, and his deputy, Ramzy Ezzeldin Ramzy.
Implement a massive humanitarian relief programme to the whole region, with peacekeeping troops in support if necessary to ensure it is delivered to where it is needed. This is not only morally right, but would again help to undermine the ideological basis of Isis and other terrorist groups.
Frank Jackson
Former co-chair, World Disarmament Campaign
Harlow
Essex
Your editorial (“After Paris, the world needs to tackle the heart of this terror – Syria”) contains wise words. However, the approach to dealing with Isis needs to be somewhat stronger than you suggest. Overwhelming force, involving land forces as well as air attacks, will clearly be needed if we are to deprive the terrorists of their territorial base. Problems of radicalisation will remain and need to be addressed. However, the destruction of the “Islamic State” is a vital first step in ridding the world of this barbaric organisation.
The Rev Andrew McLuskey
Staines, Middlesex
Your editorial suggests ways forward for France after the terrible attacks in Paris. But as with all manifestations of violence, we cannot progress without trying to understand why this dance of death continues. Calling the manifestation evil and responding with our own remote form of terror – drones and bombs – exacerbates the symptoms and offers no cure. Kenan Malik reminds us that the perpetrators probably felt “excluded, discriminated against and most of all humiliated”. It is this sense of humiliation that is perhaps hardest for us to understand but unless we try to we will not comprehend the anger that leads to young people killing in cold blood, sacrificing their lives and nurturing a deep hatred for the west. Perhaps we should just leave the Middle East alone and stop acting like arrogant, meddling gods. It is only geopolitical chess being played there, no great war for ideals, despite the rhetoric.
Professor Richard Woolley
Pickering
N Yorkshire
It is clear that for the foreseeable future the main European countries must reintroduce full border controls. In the current circumstances, the Schengen vision of a borderless Europe is not simply dead but deadly. The very first duty of the state is to provide security for its people. That duty falls firmly on the individual European states and not on the Brussels bureaucracy. A key part of that duty is to vet all people entering their territory to filter out those with hostile intent. Those who don’t share our values will have to be barred entry to Europe.
Otto Inglis
Edinburgh
Am I the only person who is unhappy about the use of the term “Islamic State”? They do not represent Islam, nor are they a state. The Arabic word “Daesh” is a much more appropriate name. It means “disunity”. Let us campaign to ensure that Daesh is used throughout the media if this group of depraved fanatics needs to be mentioned again.
David Abrams
Fareham
Hampshire
