The stage awaits.ROBERT COWEN ManchesterSir: Your report on the Palestinian child bomber (26 March) is deeply disturbing and raises serious questions about the use of children in conflict zones. Given that the Palestinians receive the highest aid package per capita in the world, why is it necessary for them to participate in armed struggle? How much richer and secure would both Palestinians and Israelis be if instead of investing in bomb-making equipment the Palestinians invested in the proper education of their workforce?One day a great leader will arise in the West Bank who will realise that the pen is mightier than the sword, and that the Palestinians and Israelis will benefit more from working together than by attacks on Israel That person is not Yasser Arafat, nor was he Sheikh Yassin. Every offer has been deemed insufficient.Yes, Palestinians are disadvantaged and downtrodden, but by none more so than their own leaders, whose policies of nihilism have naturally led them to despair. Fortunately they were rebuffed as they were again in 1956, 1967 and 1973.Every day from long before the establishment of Israel the Arabs have called for its destruction Every opportunity for dialogue has been spurned. On one occasion David ben Gurion actually fired on Menachem Begin. Let it be noted that Israel was created democratically through the vote of the General Assembly in the United Nations, and ushered in by the statesmanlike qualities of Chaim Weizman, David ben Gurion and Abba Eban.Whereas the Jewish population accepted the partition plan, the Arabs, armed to the teeth and trained incidentally by the British, wanted only to destroy Israel and consequently attacked in the hope of sweeping the fledgling state into the sea.

The only way to persuade the Israeli government to listen to reason, is to hit it where it will hurt, in its wallet.It is high time the Prime Minister showed more personal leadership on this issue, rather than venturing on strange odysseys, such as the trip to see Colonel Gaddafi.MIKE GWILLIAM London E3Sir: Again we hear from a correspondent to your newspaper that Israel was created through the actions of the terrorist groups Irgun and Zwei Leumi (“Cycle of revenge means despair for Israel and Palestine, 25 March) Not so If anything these gangs got in the way. (It is a large concrete wall and not a “fence” as the Israelis pretend).Now the Government should show European leadership by persuading the European Union to immediately suspend its trade and investment agreement with Israel, enforce punitive fines on all Israeli goods sent to Europe from the illegal settlements, withdraw all credit facilities to Israel, and impose a total arms embargo. How refreshing therefore to read Adrian Hamilton’s article “There is something we can do about Israel” (27 March).The British Government has at least publicly condemned the Israeli policy of assassination and their repression of basic rights, and many MPs have called for the dismantling of the illegal wall. Does Mr Lee imagine that Iraq was the only possible source of WMD for terrorists ? If not, who would he suggest invading next, just to put our minds at rest ?MARTIN HEATON Grimsargh, LancashireSir: Couldn’t Tony Blair have helped his old friend George Bush out of his present difficulties in Washington by letting him borrow Lord Hutton?STEPHEN WILLIAMS London SE26 Britain must lead an EU response to Israel Sir: As the Israeli repression of the Palestinian people’s economy, human rights and basic dignity increases month by month, I begin to despair of any international response, save for some ritual hand-wringing.

I doubt the people of Madrid, or indeed London, would agree with that. We feel this is in sad contrast to the usual stance of The Independent, which is to uphold international law.PAMELA MARTINMONICA AQUILINA London SE4Sir: Chris Lee’s letter of 23 March argues that if we had not invaded Iraq “we would then have to continue to assume that Saddam still had chemical weapons”. What about the weapons inspectors, who were making progress, albeit slowly? He adds that “deposing Saddam allows resources today to be concentrated on real threats That must make us all feel safer”. Clearly no US “enemies” have gained politically from the outrage.What was radically changed by the attack was the rate of approval of the Bush presidency, which gave it the freedom it needed to pursue the long-standing political objectives of the American Right.GIOVANNI CARSANIGA London SW9Sir: The front-page headline, “September 11: the shocking evidence of secret deals, missed chances and fatal misjudgements” (24 March), implied criticism of America’s failure to make an illegal armed intervention in Afghanistan before 11 September 2001. How much did Bush know about the September 11 attacks?

How much did Bush know about the September 11 attacks?
Sir: It appears that there is evidence that the Bush administration ignored various warnings of impending terrorist action (“September 11 attacks: What did Bush know?, 27 March).It is, of course, not credible that the US government would knowingly allow the destruction of the World Trade Centre and the slaughter of over 3,000 civilians; nobody could foresee the extent of the devastation caused by the attack.But a shaky and untried administration, with a President whose legitimacy had been bitterly contested, might profit from the “usual type” of hijacking, causing limited disruption and small “collateral damage”.