Letters to the Editor

Gaza, the ethics of warfare, and the C of E’s witness

From the Deans of Guildford, Bradford, and Birmingham, and 28 other deans and acting deans of English cathedrals

Madam, — In this season of profound suffering in the Holy Land, we feel compelled to speak with one voice about the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in Gaza and the West Bank. As followers of Christ, we cannot remain silent while innocent lives are lost, and human dignity is trampled.

The words of the Anglican Archbishop in Jerusalem, Dr Hosam Naoum, to the General Synod last month haunt us: “Every part of our lives and our ministries is covered with the shroud of death,” describing how his Church was “ministering in multiple life-threatening situations simultaneously”.

The situation in Gaza has reached catastrophic proportions. Civilians, including thousands of children, are dying from violence, starvation, disease, and infrastructure collapse. Reports of malnutrition, where the spectre of famine looms large, grieve us deeply. The blocking or restriction of humanitarian aid represents a moral failure that demands urgent correction.

In the West Bank, we witness continued settlement expansion in violation of international law, accompanied by increasing violence against Palestinian civilians. Movement restrictions and the destruction of homes represent systematic injustices that we cannot ignore.

We unequivocally condemn the attacks perpetrated by Hamas on 7 October 2023. The deliberate targeting and killing of innocent civilians represent a fundamental violation of human dignity and moral law. We call for the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. Terror tactics targeting civilian populations are never justified, regardless of political grievances. Equally, we condemn violence perpetrated by Israeli settlers against Palestinian civilians.

While acknowledging Israel’s legitimate right to defend itself against terrorist attacks, we believe the current military response in Gaza raises serious moral and legal questions. The principle of proportionality in warfare requires minimising harm to civilian populations, and yet the scale of civilian casualties suggests that this principle has been abandoned.

As Christians, we are called to be voices for the voiceless and advocates for justice. The Hebrew prophets consistently called God’s people to “seek justice, rescue the oppressed, defend the orphan, plead for the widow”. These ancient words speak with urgent relevance to our current moment.

We acknowledge that Palestinians and Israelis both have legitimate aspirations for security, dignity, and self-determination. Both peoples have deep historical connections to this land, both have suffered grievous losses, and both deserve to live in peace and security.

We pledge to educate ourselves and our communities about this region’s complex history while maintaining our commitment to the equal dignity of all people. We will resist anti-Semitism in all its forms while also rejecting any attempts to silence legitimate criticism of policies that violate human rights.

We call upon our Government to use its influence to ensure humanitarian aid reaches those in need and that international law is respected by all parties. We call upon fellow Christians to join us in advocating for an end to this humanitarian catastrophe and for a just peace that recognises the rights and dignity of both Palestinians and Israelis.

BOB COOPER, ANDREW BOWERMAN, MATT THOMPSON, MANDY FORD, DAVID MONTEITH, JESSICA MARTIN, TIM STRATFORD, JOHN WHITCOMBE, PETER ROBINSON, MARK BONNEY, ANDREW ZIHNI, SARAH BROWN, KAREN ROOMS, JAN MCFARLANE, SIMON JONES, SUE JONES, ROGERS GOVINDER, CHRIS DALLISTON, ANTHONY CANE, JOHN DOBSON, PHILIP HESKETH, NICHOLAS PAPADOPULOS, ABI THOMPSON, MARK OAKLEY, NEIL EVANS, JO KELLY-MOORE, JOE HAWES, SIMON ROBINSON, TOBY WRIGHT, STEPHEN EDWARDS, DOMINIC BARRINGTON
c/o Guildford Cathedral
Guildford GU2 7UP

From the Revd (Col. Rtd) Gavin Douglas

Madam, — As a priest and former professional soldier, I found the article by the Rt Revd Lord Harries (Theology Matters, 25 July) most helpful in helping to frame a response to events in Gaza, particularly in terms of discrimination and proportionality. The classic just-war criteria in jus ad bellum and jus in bello, as set out by St Augustine and others, were useful until the late medieval period, when popes would adjudicate in the claims between competing nation states. Warfare and geopolitics have evolved considerably since then, particularly in terms of the lethality of modern weapon systems designed for general war between sovereign nation states.

In addition, most contemporary conflicts are asymmetric, waged between nation states on the one hand, who should be bound by the Geneva Conventions, and on the other hand by insurgent or terrorist groups, strongly motivated by religious or cultural values, and not beholden to the sensibilities of modern Western democracies or the Laws of Armed Conflict. This is very much the situation in Gaza.

A key consideration for Western nations mindful of jus in bello is the formulation and application of stringent Rules of Engagement (ROE) upon military forces. The drivers for this are diplomatic, humanitarian, and legal. All tactical decisions in theatres of operation must conform to ROE that are generally restrictive and agreed at the political/strategic level. They particularly apply to targeting, the use of weapons, when and where the enemy may be engaged, and restrictions concerning infrastructure, urban areas, and religious, cultural, and historic sites.

Formulating ROE is not enough. It is axiomatic that forces must be trained in their use during and after any preparatory phase before operations. My own observations of events in Gaza, including recent allegations of malicious wounding by small arms, suggests that ROE are inadequate, or are being deliberately flouted, or both. Whatever the case, this reflects poorly on the Israeli military chain of command, training, and professional standards.

There is a corollary to this in the context of bombing and precision guided munitions (PGM) and asymmetric warfare. The doctrine of double effect requires that non-combatants should not be harmed intentionally, however Stephen Lee and others propose that combatants should actively avoid harming civilians (“Double Effect, Double Intention, and Asymmetric Warfare”, Journal of Military Ethics (2004). This, however, increases the risk to ground forces — particularly in a “Lo-Tech” asymmetric scenario where the opposition uses the general population and infrastructure as cover. Actively avoiding risk to civilians in these circumstances can be achieved only with stringent ROE and rigid training and military discipline, as exemplified, for example, by the British “Yellow Card” approach in Northern Ireland. Lee continues that PGM are discriminate only when used in a discriminate way: otherwise they merely kill civilians more accurately than the older “dumb” weapons. He concludes: “Double intention requires the choice of a militarily suboptimal alternative, and this would require abandoning the goal of zero combatant casualties.”

In other words, rather than using stand-off weapons, ground forces must themselves close with the enemy, distinguish them from the local population, and engage them only when ROE permit. This is not evident in Gaza.

GAVIN DOUGLAS
8 Cilgant-Y-Meillion, Rhoose Point
Vale of Glamorgan CF62 3LH

From Miss Vasantha Gnanadoss

Madam, — In the continuing situation in which any criticism of the Israeli government’s actions is likely to be branded anti-Semitic, the Archbishop of York is to be commended for his clear and courageous Statement on Gaza (online News, 24 July). May we hope that this heralds a return to a more prophetic stance by the Church of England?

VASANTHA GNANADOSS
242 Links Road
London SW17 9ER

Orgreave inquiry and the police archive

From the Revd Dr Alan Billings

Madam, — It is not lost on us in South Yorkshire that the people trusted to lead sensitive inquiries into two of the greatest scandals in the county involving the police have been Anglican bishops: a former Bishop of Liverpool for the Hillsborough football disaster (1989) and the Bishop of Sheffield for Orgreave in the miners’ strike (1984) (News, 25 July). The Established Church continues to play a valuable part in British life.

For a footnote, we could also note another Anglican contribution. When I was the Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire (2014-24), all the police Orgreave material was brought into Sheffield City archives, and I was able to fund a professional archivist to catalogue and digitise it: documents, legal papers, notebooks, film clips, and so on. This police archive, at least, is ready for redacting and then publishing by the inquiry.

We must hope that it will not be a long inquiry, given the ages of the former miners.

ALAN BILLINGS
43 Northfield Court
Sheffield S10 1QR

Kruger perspective on faith and national identity

From Canon Julian Hollywell

Madam, — Canon Angela Tilby (Comment, 25 July) utterly misses the point that Danny Kruger’s speech on the future of the Church of England was made to an empty chamber: nobody is listening. The speech was a nostalgic and paternalistic view of national identity. He conflates Christianity with British values as the populist Right do in way that alienates many in our diverse, pluralistic society.

By asserting the Church’s role as a moral anchor, Mr Kruger overlooks the reality that moral leadership in the UK now emerges from many religious and secular voices. He favours his particular model of institutional religion as a gatekeeper of public virtue, rather than recognising the evolving landscape of belief in modern Britain. In a liberal democracy, no single faith, however historic, nor faith in general for that matter, should dominate the public square or define the nation’s ethical compass.

JULIAN HOLLYWELL
St Werburgh’s Vicarage
Gascoigne Drive, Spondon
Derby DE21 7GL

Church has funds to repair its own buildings itself

From Mr Keith Porteous Wood

Madam, — Further to “Public support for preserving historic churches, study suggests” (News, 25 July), I entirely agree with the sentiment expressed: “This research provides clear, quantifiable evidence that historic churches matter deeply to the public, regardless of whether they attend religious services.”

Nevertheless, “But funding them falls on the shoulders of local people” is only partly true, because of the many millions of pounds paid under the Listed Places of Worship Grants Scheme. In this time of acute austerity, when even payments to the chronically sick are being cut back, it is unjustifiable for the State to be paying for anything that those directly reponsible could pay for themselves. In the process of awarding these grants, the Church’s substantial assets and financial capacity are not (negligently, I believe) taken into account. It is unacceptable for the State to be paying towards these costs when the Church of England at least is more than adequately able to do so.

The Church Commissioners’ investments in 2024, excluding liability for clergy pensions, were just short of £10 billion, and cathedral and diocesan investments totalled a further £3 billion, totalling £13 billion. Of this, less than £10 million (0.08 per cent) was allocated in 2023 to church repairs.

It is quite clear that the Church of England is able to pay for its own repairs for the foreseeable future and should not be pressurising the impoverished State to do so in its place.

KEITH PORTEOUS WOOD
President
National Secular Society
307 High Holborn
London WC1V 7LL

MPs’ private judgement

From the Revd Ian Scott-Thompson

Madam, — Nick Spencer (Analysis, 18 July) highlights the question whether religion should play a part in political decisions. For the irreligious politician, it seems to me that party politics itself plays a similar part. Should an MP vote according to their firm political principles, or should they vote freely after carefully considering the motion? Should they even follow their party’s manifesto, analogous to doctrine or dogma?

IAN SCOTT-THOMPSON
8 Fay Close, Fareham PO14 2RS

Green and pleasant land

From Mr Martin Randall

Madam, — Your leader comment (25 July) opines that “Britain is not looking at its best this summer.” Not so in the northernmost regions of the kingdom where, enjoying the best summer for a generation, all is lush and green and the (publicly owned) water still flows freely.

MARTIN RANDALL
7 Greenwell, Gott
Shetland ZE2 9UL