 |
| Massive nationwide protest in Israel yesterday (CBS) |
According to one estimate, over half a million people
participated. Unlike the protests before October 7th, this one was
not political. it was personal. Israelis are tired of war. They want the
hostages back and the fighting over.
It’s hard to know if this truly represents the majority. But
half a million people, from across the political spectrum, all protesting for
the same cause cannot be ignored. And to my knowledge, there was no
counter-protest.
For me the most urgent concern is the hostages. Setting
aside emotion, the hard question is: should Israel ‘throw in the towel’ and
bring the hostages home at any cost?
That question becomes sharper when we recall the case of
Gilad Shalit. He was held captive by Hamas for over five years. I don’t
remember any protests demanding that Israel do ‘whatever it takes’ to free him.
Was it because he was only one person? That would be a terrible justification.
Every hostage matters. Just because there are more hostages this time doesn’t
change the moral equation.
When Shalit was finally released in exchange for over 1,000
Palestinian prisoners, many Israelis protested the deal, calling it too high a
price. Some even blamed that deal for the October 7th massacre,
since the mastermind behind that attack was among those released. Should Israel
now make the same ‘mistake’?
At the time of the Shalit deal, I supported it. I reasoned
that the immediate, certain danger to Shalit outweighed the potential future
risks of releasing terrorists. I still believe that. To argue that the October
7th massacre was a direct result of Shalit’s release is
oversimplified. Israeli intelligence should have been able to prevent such an
attack. Had Israel been alert and ready and not ‘dropped the ball’ that day,
it’s doubtful Hamas would have succeeded.
By that logic, one could argue that the same approach is
warranted now. Get the hostages back home and be better prepared about what
might happen later. This time, Israel will have learned from past failures and
will secure and protect its borders more effectively.
But there is an important difference between the Shalit case
and today’s hostages. Today, Israel is in the midst of a military campaign
that, despite heavy costs in blood, resources, and international standing, is
achieving real progress against its most dangerous enemy. To halt the war ‘moments
before victory’, as some describe it, may be too much to ask.
Meanwhile, Hamas has recently shown willingness to accept a
deal: a temporary ceasefire and the release of 10 hostages in exchange for
hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. Until now, they had rejected such terms.
Their sudden openness suggests desperation – possibly due to the 80,000 IDF
troops in Gaza pressing forward and ignoring global outrage.
Prime Minister Netanyahu isn’t buying that deal. He insists
that all the hostages must be released. Only then, perhaps, can there be a
ceasefire. This deal is echoed by the president.
The president also wants this war to end, but he continues
to back Israel’s right to pursue security for its people. His negotiators have
made clear that Hamas - not Israel - is the side repeatedly rejecting deals
that could have freed hostages and paused the fighting. Including the latest one
which they belatedly decided to accept.
The truth is, I want what the protesters want. More than
anything, I want the hostages freed. All of them - and the war to end.
But at what price? Should Israel make another ‘Shalit-like deal? Or should it
fight on until Hamas is defeated and the hostages freed by force? Or will Hamas
slaughter them in one final act of defiance before its downfall? And even if
victory comes, what happens after? I don’t know if anyone knows the answer to that
question. It appears, however, that the president is thinking about it.
But whatever it is, it’s got to be better than what we have now.
