Netanyahu on the blueprint for the hostage deal: "We will not release thousands of terrorists"/Prime Minister's Office
A gap has been discovered between public opinion and "official" Israel: while the latter supports and supports the deal to release the hostages, which includes the release of thousands of terrorists, it turns out - according to the polls - that the Israeli public does not have a majority for such a deal.
Even before delving into the issue, it is important to note that the media reports on the matter are a bit confusing: Hamas announces that it is not backing down from its positions, Netanyahu denies that he is ready to release such a large number of terrorists, that it is impossible to know what was said for bargaining purposes and what is the truth.
The only thing that can be examined, the wording of the disinformation on the subject, is the position of the citizens of Israel (it will be emphasized again: according to surveys only) and it is interesting: about 50% oppose a deal that will include a ceasefire for a month and a half and the release of thousands of terrorists, compared to only 35% who support it.
Opponents of the deal mention Gilad Shalit, a soldier who was released from captivity in exchange for more than a thousand terrorists, some of whom returned to harm, some - such as Yahya Sinwar, became senior Hamas officials, planners and perpetrators of the barbaric attack of October 7.
In light of such a lesson from the past, they suggest looking to the future and realizing that such an act, which began with the joy of the return of dozens, perhaps even more than a hundred Israelis alive, may yet come back to us like a boomerang, in the form of an act of massacre that ends with thousands of Israelis dead.
A burnt house in Kibbutz Bari.
The State of Israel violated the contract between itself and its citizens/Avi Rokah
The differences between soldiers and civilians
But there is a big difference between a ruler's deal and what will perhaps become the kidnappers' deal.
The reference is not to the differences in the price that Israel will pay but to the deep moral difference between the two cases.
Gilad Shalit was a soldier.
As they like to say in the BCOM: "Property of the IDF", like most 18-year-old Israeli citizens.
In this draconian contract, every soldier is required to pledge that he will protect the state with his body: he may be harmed, injured, kidnapped and even die - and the hundreds of IDF martyrs in the long months of fighting are fresh and painful evidence of this.
On the other hand, a different type of contract exists between a citizen and the state: the citizen swears Because he will work all his life, the state will charge him as it sees fit a fee in the form of income tax and other taxes - when it undertakes to provide him with a variety of services in return. These include areas such as health, education, and more, but above all of these the security component is raised as a flag, certainly in a country like Israel.
We serve , we pay - and the state in return will protect our lives - routinely and on the order day. That is, if we return to the issue itself, then in the case of Gilad Shalit (as well as in the case of Ron Arad, or the late Hadar Goldin) this contract was not violated.
In the case of kidnapped citizens, it was grossly violated by the State of Israel, which at a given moment failed to fulfill its part of the contract signed with every Israeli citizen.
This is a significant difference, which does not allow the State of Israel to negotiate too harshly.
More than that: the moral obligation of the State of Israel towards the abductees outweighs consideration of the interpretation of public opinion.
This is the classic case where the customer, meaning the public, is not always right.
All of this, of course, is without mentioning that just as releasing terrorists may have future consequences, so too does neglecting the abductees to their fate: if the state abandons them, it may not be attacked from the outside, but it will definitely be destroyed from the inside.
Extend the act
This is how you will improve performance and pleasure in bed - with an exclusive sale
in collaboration with "Gabra"
Hamas prisoners are released in the Shalit deal.
Security has nothing to do with the considerations of the Prime Minister/AP
Netanyahu's only Lao
For this, a brave government is required, with a brave prime minister to lead it in this thicket where the choice is clear, but at the same time: between bad and worse.
Netanyahu uttered three praises yesterday, in his reference to the issue of the abductees deal: no to the end of the war, no to the withdrawal of forces, no to the release of thousands of terrorists.
The first condition is clear: Hamas has declared war on Israel, a war that should not end in anything less than a defeat for it.
This is not only about the justice in that, but also an important message to all the peoples of the region, who demand our harm, because we may be harassed here and there - but whoever declares war on us, it is as if he signed his own death certificate.
Here, one must assume, almost all Jewish citizens of Israel stand behind the Prime Minister, whatever his identity may be.
Withdrawal of forces is already a more elusive matter: if it is a temporary and minor withdrawal, as part of the ceasefire - let it be.
If Hamas expects a complete withdrawal of all IDF forces across the border, then here too - it will not happen and will not happen, according to the opinion of the majority of the public in Israel and its government.
As for Netanyahu's third law, this is a gross lie, since Netanyahu has already agreed in principle to accept the condition This as part of a grand deal. No senior official in the security establishment negotiates with American representatives, Egyptians, Qataris - and through them with the leadership of Hamas (at home and abroad), without carrying the emperor's scepter in his backpack, that is - with the authority and permission granted to him by the war cabinet.
Abolishing the grounds of reasonableness in the Knesset: Gallant asks for Israel's security, rival Levin celebrates victory and in the middle Netanyahu is silent/Flash 90, Yonatan Zindel
How was the Shalit deal born?
So why is Netanyahu denying a condition he has already given his consent to?
His dwindling fans who see his every act as an act of sophistication, will say that it is to confuse the enemy.
I wish
It is more likely that Netanyahu saw the reactions of his coalition partners, saw the polls and decided to go with them, at least officially.
how do you know
We check Netanyahu's resume and see that even in matters of principle, the only thing that guides him is public opinion:
this was the case with the outline of the foreign workers on which he labored and that same was shelved, this was the case with the discussions on legal legislation by agreement - when a compromise was reached around the dispute that tore the nation apart - Diron Olam will forever remember the scene in which The Minister of Defense (who knew at the time how great the military danger was) begs: "Give me something", but the Prime Minister ignores, with on the other side of him Rival Levin, who makes it clear to Galant who is the owner of the house here.
In fact, this was also the case with the Shalit deal: the full price was paid only when the Prime Minister fell into distress following the social protest of the summer of 2011.
And here we are back to the starting point: because the opponents of the deal (that is, to its proposed outlines as published in the media) mention (rightly!) the Shalit deal as a valley The scourge of Israel-Hamas relations, a direct line drawn between it and the October 7th massacre, deserves to be mentioned that it would never have come into existence if it were not for whoever decides, does so only to preserve his rule, even at the cost of harming the security of the state.
That was the case in the 12 years that separate the Shalit deal from the Simchat Torah attack, which claimed the lives of about 1,400 Israelis, and it is the same now, when the lives of more than a hundred Israelis are at stake.
More on the same topic:
abducted
Gaza war
Benjamin Netanyahu
outline