This trickle of aid is down to the public, not our hard-hearted PM

The Herald Scotland

5 days ago

Some aid was delivered by landing the Hercules on dirt strips. About half was delivered by air drop: flying 15ft above the ground and pushing pallets of grain out of the rear door. Both methods carried significant risk to both the starving on the ground and to the aircrew, and neither could deliver more than a few truckloads of aid each day. But both delivered much more aid than para drop could.
Delivering aid by air is difficult, dangerous and extremely expensive; it's appropriate only when there is no other option. In Gaza, the so-called safe area of Al-Mawasi is only 10 miles by road from the Rafah crossing from Egypt; just north of Gaza is a major Israeli port with road access to Gaza just a few miles away. This is one of the worst aspects of the famine in Gaza: unlike in Ethiopia, where access to the famine areas was extremely difficult, in Gaza there is a mountain of aid sitting close by, but kept inaccessible by Israel's actions.
The fact that Benjamin Netanyahu is now allowing a trickle of aid into [[Gaza]] is a sign that international pressure on his government has an effect. Most of the pressure here has come from the public and I'm grateful to [[The Herald]], BBC and other media outlets for giving voice to the outrage and despair felt by so many. It's a pity the UK Government is too timid to challenge [[Israel]]. It appears that Mrs Thatcher was more compassionate and more of a leader than Sir Keir Starmer.
Doug Maughan, Dunblane.
• Instead of the ineffective, totally inadequate, dangerous and distracting air drop of aid, I would suggest that there should be an air drop of EU and UN troops who could then securely – and peacefully – ensure safe passage for the recognised international agencies to deliver the aid waiting at the Gaza border.
It's time to call a decisive halt to the atrocities this Israeli Government is perpetrating and to show we mean business by meaningful action.
Our Government's mealy-mouthed words won't save lives.
William Thomson, Denny.
Read more letters
William Thomson, Denny.
An appalling juxtaposition
It is beyond words that the people who knew suffering, as no others did, should starve to death their neighbours – babies, children, mothers, young and old.
It is, in fact, beyond comprehension unless you know that the government of [[Israel]] wants the land of Palestine, [[Gaza]], for itself as it always has. It needs the land devoid of population – hence the genocide.
All the while, it's mantra has been 'Israel has the right to self-defence'. Since when did starving children, babies, war-weary mothers create a threat to Israel?
Sadly, Israel will now go down in history, not for what its people suffered but for the suffering they have inflicted on their neighbours and by their side, Israel's allies, the US and the UK are a party to the war crimes Israel has committed.
[[Gaza]] is a wasteland. Its people have been decimated with 60,000 dead and meanwhile Donald Trump plays golf in Scotland and [[Keir Starmer]] and John Swinney drop in for a chat.
The juxtaposition of these colliding worlds and the reality of those in Gaza, who are literally starving to death is, indeed, beyond words.
Flora Komori, Edinburgh.
Onus now on both sides
I recently listened to a very moving and blunt speech made by the late former Labour minister Gerald Kaufman in 2009 on the Israel-Hamas conflict. It must have taken a lot of courage to come out and condemn the actions of the side that you effectively belong to.
We need more people like him, from both sides, to start speaking out properly and we need a more forceful input from the UN. The first steps are glaringly obvious and must happen immediately to enable proper talks to start.
Hamas must release all hostages and the Israelis must cease bombings and allow the food and water supplies to be distributed, immediately.
My empathy with Jewish people following the Holocaust is burnt into my soul. As a boy in the 1950s it was truly horrendous to see footage of the camps and realise a so-called civilised nation could carry out the atrocities on such a huge scale over such a short period of time, without any intervention from neighbouring countries.
The pictures of starving children in Gaza is the final straw and must surely move all of the western and neighbouring Arab governments to focus on helping to put an end to this horrendous war. They have the means, they need the will to do it now.
John Gilligan, Ayr.
Thank you, Scotland
I would like to applaud the Scottish people for their visible stand against the visit of US President Donald Trump. He is not the type of person that I like representing me as a citizen of the United States. We are better than that.
I have never been able to figure out how so many people here could possibly think that he would make a good president. He lies, he cheats, he's a misogynist and a racist. For a country that was supposedly made great by its diversity and equity, he has dismantled every DEI initiative ever put in place. And now he's threatening to defund one of the greatest universities in the world over 'antisemitism'.
Being pro-Palestinian has nothing to do with being against the Jewish people. It's about being against the genocide of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government. Donald Trump is fully supportive of Benjamin Netanyahu's government. He is in fact, just a terrible person. Thank you, Scotland, for your unwelcoming stance towards the worst president in US history.
Su Joffrion, Grand Junction, Colorado, USA.
Former Labour minster Gerald Kaufman (Image: PA)
Wind power no benefit to Scotland
I am in favour of renewables power, but Alan Simpson has a valid point about the proliferation of onshore wind farms in Scotland ("Rural Scots are right, it is time to pause onshore wind farms. There are more than enough already", The Herald, July 28).
Scotland led the way on renewables, especially wind, and for many of us Scots it pointed toward a future of a self-sufficiency of cheaper home-grown power. Given the demise of regional electricity pricing, there is now zero benefit in this for Scotland and the whole thing seems to have been taken over by England's energy needs. Scots will also have to pay extra for the nuclear generators being planned for England.
How will the foreign energy companies who are making billions out of Scotland's huge energy potential try to sell this in the future? Their only motive appears to be profit for them, and their Scottish customers are left, literally, out in the cold. Perhaps they could explain why the costs for people who live adjacent to these turbines in rural Scotland are always higher than people in the far south, who have no power generation at all.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
• How much research did Alan Simpson do for his column on wind farms? Wind turbines are not made of plastic but steel. They don't necessarily involve disturbing peat either. For example, the wind farm development at Stronelairg near Fort Augustus also includes an extensive peat restoration project. Perhaps Mr Simpson should go and look at it. He might learn something useful that he could share with us.
Jackie Kemp, Leith.
NatWest folly
I was disgusted when I read the headline that NatWest was giving £1.5 billion back to shareholders ("Natwest gives £1.5bn to shareholders as profits boosted by acquisitions", The Herald, July 26) and that the UK taxpayer, who had bailed out the bank (as RBS) 17 years ago to the tune of £45.5bn, was to miss out as the Government had already sold back our shares for around £35bn – a loss to the UK taxpayer of £10.5bn.
Think how far that money could have gone to help our infrastructure, schools, hospitals, NHS etc. Who gave the OK to sell off when they did? The bank had turned the corner and if they had waited a few more years we could have recouped the full amount.
Fraser Hamilton, Balfron.