A False Analogy

 

One of the more popular arguments with those who argue that Israel's military actions in Lebanon are disproportionate is that the United Kingdom, facing a similar threat from the IRA, did not engage in any military actions at all neither against the Republic of Ireland nor against the Catholic areas of Northern Ireland.

On the face of it, this argument appears to make some sense. Wasn't the IRA after all one of the most feared and best-armed terrorist groups in the world? Didn't it bomb civilian targets in Northern Ireland and in mainland Britain? Wasn't the problem finally resolved through diplomacy rather than through British military retaliation?

Even the most superficial analysis of the two situations will quickly show that this is a false analogy. Unlike Hezbollah, the IRA did not control any part of the Republic of Ireland's territory and was not therefore in a position to rain rockets on British towns. Nor was the Republic of Ireland in a state of war with the United Kingdom. Nor was the IRA committed to the destruction of the United Kingdom. Nor was the UK a country of 6 million people surrounded by actual and potential enemies.

The UK treated the IRA mostly as a domestic law and order problem because, for all its seriousness, it was mainly that. The majority of Northern Ireland's population wanted to be part of the UK, a minority did not and carried out terrorist attacks. The police, supported by troops, contained the problem until both sides were ready for an arrangement that continued to respect the principle of self-determination for the people of Northern Ireland and did not substantially alter the constitutional status of the territory.