In a mathematical equation, 1+1 always = 2.
In an ideological equation, 1+1 can sometimes = 6+10.
When it comes to the lives of its soldiers, Israel does not think mathematically, Israel thinks ideologically. And that makes the equation much more difficult to analyze, much more difficult to work out and much more emotionally laden. Ideological equations are not computed in our brains, they are wrenched from our hearts.
And that is the how and the why explaining Israel’s decision to engage in talks with Hizbullah over the exchange of one famous Hizbullah terrorist, four live Lebanese prisoners, one Israeli Druze who spied for Hizbullah and ten dead Lebanese for two Israeli soldiers taken captive over the Lebanese border by Hizbullah in the summer of 2006. For Israel, it’s 16 for 2 when the two are Ehud Goldwasser, affectionately known by the entire country as Udi, and Eldad Regev.
The faces of Udi and Eldad, along with the face of Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier taken captive by Hizbullah’s Gaza counterpart, Hamas, are known to every Israeli (and probably almost every Jew worldwide). Their birthdays are noted. Their family members are recognized on streets and in airports. Their capture is mourned, but they have not been turned into martyrs.
That is not the Israeli way.
That is the Hizbullah way.
And that is why it is so important for Hizbullah to include the famous terrorist Samir Kuntar in this prisoner exchange.
Samir Kuntar is a symbol more than a man for Hizbullah. He represents the ideal terrorist, someone every Hizbullah member hopes his child will become. On April 22, 1979, Kuntar arrived on Israeli shores in a rubber speedboat and terrorized the Haran family in their home in the port city of Nahariya. Within one hour he had shot and then drowned Danny Haran in front of his four-year-old daughter, Anat, and then turned around and bludgeoned and bashed the little girl. He bashed, he brutalized, he butted. He shot, he drowned, he bludgeoned.
Fearing for their lives, Smadar Haran and her twenty-four-month-old daughter, Yael, hid with a neighbor in a crawl space. Cradling her daughter in a loving embrace and fearing the infant’s cries would alert the murderers, Smadar inadvertently, tragically, smothered the helpless child.
In every negotiation between Israel and Hizbullah, Samir Kuntar is on the table. Hizbullah has not yet secured his release and Kuntar is in an Israeli prison, sentenced to four life terms. But this time, only thirty years into his sentence, Hizbullah might just get its man.
These deals are never simple. This one is even more complex. When the sides refuse to negotiate directly, when conversations are conducted through third parties, the risk of miscommunication is obvious. In this type of sensitive negotiation the possibility for misunderstanding and the probability of misinterpretation is great.
Israel and the Arab world have negotiated and successfully arranged several swaps over the past several years. Many more have fallen apart. For the most part Israel has received dead Israeli soldiers and returned live prisoners – and that was OK, because every Israeli is deserving of burial at home. One notable exception is the recent swap Israel conducted with Lebanon that resulted in the return of Elhanan Tannenbaum, an Israeli businessman and former IDF colonel who was captured by Hizbullah in Lebanon.
The question is not whether Israel should do everything to free Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. According to a poll published by the Israeli daily Haaretz, 63% of Israelis think releasing Kuntar for Goldwasser and Regev is a good idea; 21% do not agree; and the remaining 16% are unsure.
The question is what happens when Israel exchanges live terrorist symbols for Udi and Eldad. Does a bargain of this magnitude increase the risk of more captured soldiers? Hizbullah has already proclaimed that capturing Israelis is one of its most sought after goals – no doubt because capturing Israeli soldiers is such an effective way to bring Israel to its knees.
Two more questions are: What is the obligation of a country to the families of the victims? – and what is the obligation of a country to the justice system that tries and sentences terrorists? When the exchange centers on the dead bodies of terrorists, decisions are easier. When it centers on live terrorists, the decision is more complex.