Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

March 5 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew

Close

New on NRO . . .

The Corner

The one and only.

Print   |  Text
 

The “Moderates” Celebrate the Shalit Swap

Well, spring is certainly in the air today as the Middle East’s ubiquitous moderate Muslim groups mark Israel’s profoundly self-defeating exchange: a single Israeli soldier traded for the release of over a thousand prisoners — nearly half of them convicted terrorists, as Daniel Pipes notes

I am loath to disagree with the estimable David French (or, for that matter, with Jonathan Tobin, who David cites and whose observations are always worth considering), but count me with Daniel. I respectfully suggest that there is an enormous difference between the “never leave anyone behind” ethos and paying ransom to terrorists. We don’t leave our soldiers behind, either, but it’s also U.S. policy (or at least it used to be) not to negotiate with terrorist organizations – because rewarding their extortion creates perverse incentives that dramatically increase the danger to soldiers and civilians.

Gilad Shalit was never left behind or treated as if he were expendable — Israel has never forgotten him and has pushed for his return since his capture. But, while I concede Prime Minister Netanyahu the best of intentions, he has precisely treated Israelis as if they were expendable. 447 terrorists are going back to the jihad. They now have an even more powerful incentive to kill more Israelis and abduct more soldiers: a life sentence for terrorism, they’ve learned yet again, is not really a life sentence, and a single kidnapped soldier is a sure chit to be played for hundreds of soldiers. As Caroline Glick points out in this poignant post, many more than one Israeli will be killed because of what happened today — we just don’t know their names yet. And while we can appreciate the rejoicing of Sgt. Shalit’s parents, many other anguished Israelis are now coming to grips with the fact that, though their loved ones are never coming home, the killers have been released to kill again.

Moreover, if Caroline is correct (as she nearly always is), the lop-sided swap is only one component of this foolish deal. It is reported that Netanyahu also agreed to give the leadership of Hamas safe passage from Syria to their soon-to-be new perch in [surprise!] Egypt. For years, Hamas has had sanctuary from the execrable Assad regime (since they are both supported by Iran). It has, however, become dicey in Syria for Hamas leaders because Assad’s main opposition is … the Muslim Brotherhood (of which Hamas is the Palestinian branch). It makes much more sense, then, for Hamas to set up shop in Egypt – the headquarters of the Brotherhood, which is already starting to run the place.

Obviously, Netanyahu is under great pressure from the Obama administration and Europe, which insist on pretending that the Brotherhood is a moderate, “largely secular” political party and on laying the groundwork for Hamas to be branded that way, too. But it is hard to see how it is in Israel’s interest to facilitate the safe transfer of the leadership of a group pledged to its destruction in order that this group can enjoy safe haven from its parent organization – which is similarly pledged to Israel’s destruction.

The indispensable MEMRI is watching reaction to the Shalit exchange. Here’s a delightful little ditty from a website affiliated with Fatah. (You may recall Fatah as the heirs to Yassir Arafat who control Judea and Samaria — they’re considered the Palestinian “moderates” by comparison to Hamas):

This soldier was a waif born in a shelter as a result of the deterioration and disintegration of Israeli society. A Zionist soldier, he became seeped with Zionism to the bone… This monster joined the army of Zionist gangs, to carry on the legacy of his fathers, the apes and pigs of the Haganah, Irgun, Stern, and Palmach organizations, in order to carry out the orders of his fascist masters. That was the Zionist soldier Gilad Shalit, 19 years-old when he was captured by the Palestinian resistance.

This incompetent soldier became the most prized soldier in all the armies of the world. He entered the annals of history through the widest gate, and his name went down in the Guinness Book of World Records…. The world was in turmoil as the Arab leaders, the West, and the monstrous mini-state [Israel] waged a five-year publicity and marketing campaign throughout the world in an attempt to liberate the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit…. He was a focus of interest for journalists and political and military analysts in all the electronic and printed media, while the conscience of those flaccid leaders remained unmoved by the [plight of] our courageous heroes and glorious prisoners hidden away in the dungeons of the enemy’s strongholds.

Alrighty then. Next up, from moderate Jordan, we have those those moderate rascals from the Muslim Brotherhood:

The Hamas movement must secure a new prisoner in order to free additional [Palestinian] prisoners from the jails of the occupation, because those who will not be released as part of the Shalit deal now feel and understand that their salvation depends on [the capture of] a new prisoner. This great national duty must be fulfilled, if not by Hamas then by any other organization….

The latest exchange deal was great and magnificent … a victory for the Hamas movement and the entire Palestinian people. It confirms that continuing the resistance is the [right] path and option [to take] until the Palestinian rights are restored in full, without exception…. The freed prisoners will be birds of freedom and torches to light the fire of resistance, and they are the incontrovertible proof that the Palestinian right[s] will only be restored through resistance….

Fabulous. As you’d expect, Hamas is obligingly weighing in:

As we say goodbye to Shalit, we hope to welcome a new guest, to capture a new soldier, to hurt the enemy in a way that will humiliate and distress him, to pull his soldiers from their tanks and even shoot down their planes, to destroy their vehicles and to lead them, handcuffed, to our jails. This, in order to … liberate those whom the enemy is [still] holding in his prisons and whom he refuses to free because they have shed his blood, humiliated him, killed the best of his soldiers, rubbed the noses of his crack units in the dirt, and forced his leaders to surrender and accept their terms. Goodbye, Shalit, and hello to the new prisoner who will replace you and by means of whom we will humiliate your army and your leadership. We will not surrender, give up or disdain [our duty] until we get back the last of our prisoners and destroy the last of the detention facilities that the enemy has constructed on our own soil…

 

It’s probably best to close, as Caroline did, with the cautionary words of a wise Israeli:

Prisoner releases only embolden terrorists by giving them the feeling that even if they are caught, their punishment will be brief. Worse, by leading terrorists to think such demands are likely to be met, they encourage precisely the terrorist blackmail they are supposed to defuse.

Those words were written by Benjamin Netanyahu. It was 1995, and I fear he was as prophetic then as he is foolish now.

New on The Corner. . .


COMMENTS   18

EXPAND  

Vonny
   10/18/11 18:09

Judea and Samaria?

It's called the West Bank Andy!

Can your Zionist propaganda be any more obvious?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Dr. Rachel Tassa
   10/20/11 15:09

West Bank of What?
Instead of revealing his ignorance one should learn some history:
To begin with, the entire area of the State of Israel (except for the Golan Heights) is on the West Bank of the River Jordan.
Historic item #1: San Remo Peace Conference of April 1920 after the end of WW1. There, a treaty was signed in which Great Britain was given mandate authority over "Palestine" (until the end of the war the area was ruled by the Ottoman Turks for 400 years since 1516, but in the war they lost their entire empire to the French and the British empires.) According to this resolution the British mandate was to prepare Palestine to become the "national home for the Jewish People." Palestine, according to the Treaty, comprised territories which are at the present day the total areas of the states of Jordan and Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza. Present-day Israel comprises only 23% of Palestine as defined and ratified by the League of Nations at the San Remo Peace Conference. In 1922, Great Britain with questionable authority split off 77% of the lands originally designated to the Jewish people - all of Palestine east of the Jordan River - and granted it to Abdullah 1st, who declared himself king to the state which is now known by the name Jordan.
This partition of 1922 was the decisive partition of Palestine between Jews and Arabs.

Historic item #2: The following resolution regarding this disputed area took place in the UN in November 1947. It recommended a further partition of the West Bank of the River Jordan between two states: a Jewish State and yet another new Arab State. The Jews accepted the recommendation, the Arabs – rejected it.
After the rejection of the UN resolution, in 1948 the Jordanian military invaded the territory west of the River Jordan and at the end of the Israeli War of Independence, unilaterally annexed the area you are referring to as the West Bank. No member state of the UN recognized this annexation except Britain and Pakistan.
Nineteen years later, the Jordanian Legion attacked the State of Israel on the 5th of June 1967, and in an act of self-defense the IDF captured this area. What is considered today to be the "West Bank" by groups of certain political orientation is the ex-West Bank of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Why ex-West Bank? Since, later on, in 1988, King Hussein of Jordan relinquished all claims of Jordan to this area.

Why Judea and Samaria?
Historic item #3: Politically the Arabs in this area choose to call themselves "Palestinians", but they actually see themselves as part of the vast Arab nation. The Jews on their part never appreciated the name "Palestina" to their homeland since it was a derogative name the Romans imposed on the Province. (Of course, the people who lived in Palestina were never called by this name). After a bloody eight year rebellion of the Jews against the Roman occupation of their land (66 CE – 74 CE), the Romans struck a special triumphant coin depicting the words: IVDEA CAPTA, meaning in English "Judea conquered" – they knew what land rebelled: Judea, not Palestina. Source: Wikipedia, Judaea Capta coinage

Perhaps you are ignorant to the fact that the word Jew, Yehudi in Hebrew, comes from Yehudah, the name of the tribe of King David and later the name of the Kingdom of Judea of all its border changes. Samaria in Latin and Shomron in Hebrew - is the area of the biblical Kingdom of Israel. Its capital Shomron was built by King Ahab; The Kingdom became known also as the Kingdom of Shomron. After the Assyrians destroyed this kingdom they have exiled the aristocracy but the people fled to Judea, to their own brethren and simply integrated there. Hundreds of years later the city of Shomron was rebuilt by Herod the Great who called it Samaria in Latin.

These areas are full of archeological evidence of Judea and of Samaria. These are the ethnic and cultural roots of both the Jews of Israel and of the Jews around the world.

So please, do not let your anti-Zionist propaganda – the new liberal form of anti-Semitism – distort historic facts.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 18:10

I really don't understand how anyone can side with the Palestinians.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 18:17

I just saw the footage on Fox of the celebrations of the Palastinians welcoming their murderers home. I'll admit, my thought was, "Please, just one cluster bomb..."

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 19:17

Hopefully the Israeli Army aim is better next time, so this prison nonsense doesn't keep playing out. And it will, and the ratios (which are bad) will only get worse for Israel.

A dead terrorist is far better then a "locked up for now" one. At least a dead one stays dead, a locked up one doesn't stay that way.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 18:23

No one admires Netanyahu more than I. Many times, spanning several American administrations, I have wished we could trade our President for him.
That said, it is terribly disappointing to see Netanyahu sign off on such a terrible deal. It is one thing to be compassionate; it is another be to a fool. Certainly, it is good to see the young soldier reunited with his family, but at what price?
The one thing you can say with certainty is that hundreds more Israelis and others will lose their lives at the hands of those terrorists that have been released. You can also bet the farm that Hamas will only take more hostages in order to negotiate additional surrenders.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 19:51

This is an increasingly rare occassion on which I agree with Rabbi Boteach (who often is border-line left wing).

External Link 

Israel is operating according to the belief that a life, in this case the life of a soldier who puts his life on the line defending innocents, is of infinite value and therefore the price for his freedom while extraordinarily high must ultimately must be paid.

Rabbi Boteach argues that these monsters who are being released NEVER should have been serving multiple life sentences in the first place but rather should have been executed.

Israel must institute the death penalty for terrorists. To do so is to confirm the infinite value of life and at the same time remove the bartering chip Hamas is using now to release murders.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Galt's Bane
   10/18/11 18:25

I notice that while Mr. McCarthy has accused the Obama administration of negotiating with terrorists (the Iranian government), he seems to forget that a certain American President sought to provide arms to these same terrorists in exchange for the release of hostages.

I'm sorry, what was that President's name again? Hint. It wasn't Obama.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Bart
   10/18/11 19:01

That's the first thought I had. I think you're talking about Ronald Reagan.

But you can't be, because you imply that he actually provided aid and comfort to a nation that was actively engaged in war against the United States both directly (1979-80) and indirectly (1983) (but what's 240+ U.S. Marines among friends?).

And since one can NEVER accuse Ronald Reagan of being less than Strong when it comes to dealing with our nation's enemies - much less meekly and secretly acquiescing in their demands and providing them with weapons they could use against the our allies and ourselves, you must be mistaken.

It would be like accusing Ronald Reagan of being soft on illegal aliens because he signed a bill granting amnesty to illegal aliens.

Or accusing him of recklessly squandering the wealth of future generations because he borrowed money heedlessly and needlessly.

Or accusing him of aggrandizing the federal government at the expense of the states because he used federal power to coerce states into obeying federal whims re commercial regulation and the sale of alcohol to minors.

Or accusing him of expanding the federal government because he added federal departments and agencies and massively increased federal spending during his tenure.

So you can't possibly be right.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 18:32

-----The one thing you can say with certainty is that hundreds more Israelis and others will lose their lives at the hands of those terrorists that have been released.-----

that you can not say.

what we can say with certainty is that it would have been better for Israel if they had traded Netanyahu for Shalit.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 18:45

I agree with nearly all of it. We can celebrate Shalit's return, but we know that the released prisoners will kill people in the future. Doesn't seem like a good exchange.

But let's drop the nonsense about not negotiating with terrorist, okay? It's a pretty piece of rhetoric, but it doesn't match up with reality. We negotiate with terrorists. So does Israel. If you don't believe me, go ask Michael Ledeen, who has written about this several times, and who (of course) was involved in selling weapons to lunatic Iranian theocrats. You may find that sort of action to be unwise, short-sighted, and even treasonous, and you wouldn't be alone, but it's been going on for a long time, and it's standard practice.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 19:09

While we're on the subject of prisoner swaps, today Herman Cain said that he could see himself agreeing to an al Queda demand that he, as president, release all the prisoners at GITMO in exchange for the release of a single US soldier. Unless he immediately retracts this without qualification, his candidacy is doomed. I'm sure he'll be given a chance at the upcoming debate.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
Robert Johnson
   10/18/11 19:34

Isreal is in a tough position on this. They had relied on Egypt and Turkey as a bulwark against cataclysmic craziness by Palestinians and other muslims. Now, both of those buffers are lost, and Isreal seems to be resigned that greater violence/terrorism from Egypt, Gaza, and possibly the West Bank is inevitable. I believe Isreal is trying to buy goodwill among Americans and European elites and diplomats prior to an inevitable crackdown in Gaza and/or the West Bank that will follow from an uptick in terrorism from those areas. Now, when things go crazy, Isreal can say we have been VERY accomodating to our enemies, and you see what it got us--we now need to use more strident tactics.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
DonM
   10/18/11 20:02

After Shalit is safe, Israel can and should invade Gaza, hunt down the terrorists, and kill or recapture them. If they can get the Hamas leadership too, so much the better.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 20:27

I can't help be reminded of the often misinterpreted meaning of the Dred Scott decision. Does this mean that a Palestinian criminal or terrorist has 1/1000th the value of an Israeli soldier? Just wondering.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/18/11 21:16

Andy, an excellent piece of commentary. I continue to be disappointed by the reaction of the Israeli government in so many ways. Whatever you say about Netanyahu, he's no Mechachem Begin when it comes to dealing with terrorists who fervently want Israel to disappear from the face of the earth. And too many Jews here in America don't seem that engaged either.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   10/19/11 07:28

I did not agree that this was a good or reasonable exchange of one young man for thousands of terrorists - many with blood on their hands. But I think the one thing that you are missing, Andrew - and with the utmost of due respect - and that is there is no comparison between an American policy toward dealing with terrorists and what the Israelis do in a situation like this.

The reason is that only a small percentage of American families have a deeply personal investment in the national security of our country. In Israel, EVERY family has a deep personal investment of a son, daughter, brother, husband, dad, uncle.

In another post on the Corner yesterday I referred to this being a type of Saving Private Ryan moment for Israel. They needed to save this young man who was kidnapped from the IDF right out of high school - every Israeli parent's nightmare. Service required of all their children.

The first Israeli Prime Minister David Ben Gurion said,"May every Jewish mother know that she has put her son under the care of commanders who are up to the task."

At this time, besieged Israel has few friends in the world to take its side whole heartedly and the future looks mighty bleak. Israelis needed to save Gilad Shalit to encourage and gird their own hearts for the battle that continues to swirl around them.

This will not make them weaker against the enemy, it will strengthen them to know what a single young Israeli soldier's life is worth to the nation.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
ventanax5
   10/20/11 21:49

Andrew,

Under the Koby Mandell act can the USA go after the terrorists Israel released that have killed Americans in the act of terror?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact