Ben Jamal gives an eloquent description of the inhumane situation in Gaza (Gaza blockade is extraordinarily cruel, October 17), whereas Name and Address Supplied continues his/her tirade against anyone trying to promote peace in the region – this time s/he picks on the United Nations (Three reasons for Middle East troubles, October 17).

I am sure no one who has the slightest knowledge of Middle East history stretching back well before World War II would subscribe to the insulting analogy of “two dogs fighting over a bone”.

The situation is much more complex. Criticism of the United Nations may well be justified, but it cannot be said that the concept of mutually assured destruction (Mad) has ensured world peace.

There has patently not been world peace since the invention of the atom bomb, and there have been numerous occasions when the world has come disastrously close to catastrophe as a result of the possession of nuclear weapons.

However, the effectiveness of the UN is regularly undermined by the nuclear weapons states (US, Russia, China, UK and France), which are the permanent members of the Security Council, vetoing resolutions because they are following their own interests instead of those of world peace.

One can only hope that the recent outrageous acts in Gaza, the injustice of which has been acknowledged worldwide, will bring about a reasonable consensus within the United Nations, and that it can give full backing to attempts to reach a lasting and just peace settlement.

GILLIAN HURLE

West Molesey