I always hesitate to disagree with Daniel Pipes, but I think he’s wrong to shame Israeli leaders for the Shalit deal. I like Jonathan Tobin’s take, at Commentary:
[W]hat Netanyahu did in agreeing to the swap was to reaffirm the basic social contract of Israeli life. In a small, besieged country where the overwhelming majority of all young men and many young women must serve in the army, the idea of never leaving anyone behind is more than just a function of military esprit de corps as one might find in any elite unit in the U.S. armed forces. Israelis accept the risks of serving as conscripts and then in the reserves for many years on the condition the country’s leadership will not treat them as expendable.
Israel’s strength lies not in its ability to deter any given act of terror (indeed, the hate that drives the jihadists is often immune to cost/benefit analysis) but in its core values and a military that not only embodies those values but is willing to fight an unending war in their defense. As Tobin notes, the released prisoners will have no impact on the course of the long-term struggle. Palestinian prison populations will come and go, but Israel’s declaration to its men and women in uniform that they will never be forgotten, that they will never be left behind, has value well above the cold math of prisoner exchanges.
I hope every one of those released by Israel has been quietly microchipped and can be located at will. Orwellian, you say? Yeah, maybe, but I'm having trouble getting all worked up over it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt truly is a "cold math" that makes one live kidnapped soldier worth the hundreds of dead (future) victims of the terrorist attacks to be perpetrated by the thousand terrorists released in this deal.
I thought Israel realized it was in a war. A country is fighting for its existence and the sentimentality of one known casualty outweighs the many future victims we know are going to die at the hands of the jihadists freed today. That attitude spells the doom of Israel.
For some reason I'm reminded of the last scene of the movie Casablanca. Rick's speech to Ilsa about the sacrifice he was choosing to make. I guess they've forgotten that lesson.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseEasy to sit here in the USA and see it in more black & white terms than those sitting in Israel see it.
Israel has not forgotten they are in an existential war by a long shot. That's why it took years before any deal was struck.
Always easier to judge what others are living.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe're all living in the same war. Israel is now on the front line. We were on the front line 10 years ago.
The people who are dying in the future -- people who will be killed by the terrorists released in this deal -- will be the ransom paid for the release of one hostage, Gilad Shalit.
A representative government has a duty to the victims of the future. Since they are currently nameless, today all the talk is about Shalit - a soldier who knew that he could be called upon to die for his country.
Sentimentality has triumphed over a sense of duty.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAmen. But what they have done is worse than irresponsible. It is immoral to place a citizen in harms way in the future to spare one who is already in harms way today. No government has the right to trade the lives of its citizens in this way. To the extent that they have now encourage future kidnappings or allowed future terror by those released, the Israeli leaders have made themselves accomplices to it and will surely suffer the political consequences.
On the other hand, Israel WILL be nuked eventually so maybe this controversy is moot.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI agree that no man should be left behind..... but by giving in to the hostage takers demands they have insured that more young soldiers will be kidnapped in the future. This is a cynical political move by Bibi that will endanger many young soldiers in the future. Strategically it makes no sense whatsoever.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo easy to call it a cynical political move and blame the Prime Minister but the Israeli Cabinet voted 26 in favor, 3 against.
Whether these released terrorists or new ones, Hamas is going to keep coming to kidnap and kill Israelis.
This is a "Saving Private Ryan" kind of situation and decision Israel had to make, and did. Those types of decisions are not always head over heart decisions.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'd prefer to grab a big chunk of the West Bank, then offer The Philistines a deal. "Would you like half of this territory back? Then give us Shalit."
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThat's how I feel about 'Land for Peace', which predictably turned out to be 'Land for Empty Promises'.
There has been no Peace, when do we get the Land back?
Incredibly stupid and shortsighted deals have long lasting consequences.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm sure there is a line - the idea that there isn't is absurd. What boggles me is that this was the line deemed acceptable.
On the other hand, this is truly like a parent negotiating for the release of a son. Everything would be on the table. Seen in that light, it makes some sense. But that is a poor metaphor for running a nation.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI like Tobin's take as well. There are very few things in our world so powerful as a symbol.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI like both Frenchs' and Tobin's take.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust one Warriors opinion.
sure it is easy to critique this move. But we're judging Israel and saying nothing about the arabs on the other side.
The world faces a culture that finds kidnapping to be completely acceptable as a source of income. The Islamic republic of Iran just shook us down for quite a bit to obtain the return of those hikers.
Kidnapping is just what they do. Where's the hue and cry about that? Is the press OK with this particular facet of the culture?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseA friend in Israel writes, "I have never seen so much national unity and happiness as today in Israel. There was not a dry eye in all of Israel. Yet, it was so bittersweet with the terrorists that were freed and rejoicing. But since the deal is already done, what gives me hope is that the people of Israel are willing to pay a high price for life, and the other side is willing to go to great lengths to celebrate murder and death. That's what will be seen in the world."
At least that's what the honest people in the world will take note of.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt seems to me that the Muslims have set the value of an Israeli soldier at 1027 Muslims. The next time an Israeli soldier is killed by the Muslims, Netanyahu should extract payment in kind.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe will never have peace until they love their children more than they hate us.
- Golda Meir
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI hope it's really true that "released prisoners will have no impact on the course of the long-term struggle." But isn't that the issue -- can those 500 or so trained terrorists, together with the tens of thousands who now will join them believing that they will be released even if caught and convicted of terrible acts of terrorism, reasonably be expected to adversely affect Israel's long-term chances to survive as a country? Whether this deal was good depends on the answer to that question, not assuming it away.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI guess I see it differently. IMO, Hamas just set the exchange rate for what one Israeli life is worth; 1,027 Palestinians. So the next time Hamas blows up a bus or club or market or wedding with how ever many Israeli casualties, then n x 1,027 = the number of Palestinians who must be sacrificed.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGlad you agree with me.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe exchange is shockingly ill-advised if taken at face value.
One should probably think about why Hamas and Netanyahu decided to make this deal, or any deal, at this time.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse