Israel Unwilling to Do What It Takes to Free Gilad Shalit   

Gildad Shalit is another excuse for what Israel really wants--to continue an endless war and hold on to the territories. 

Shalit: The Excuse for Israel's Policy

Lev Grinberg*

Thousands of Israelis are marching everyday to commemorate four years since Gilad Shalit's imprisonment by Hamas. They want to remind the Government its commitment to bring back home all war prisoners. But Shalit is just like peace: everybody wants it, but nobody is willing to pay the price. Just like Prime Minister Ehud Barak in 2000 reminded his critics what he had been willing to pay for peace – 91% of the occupied territories and some neighborhoods in Eastern Jerusalem – Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu now tells the demonstrators marching across Israel in support of a prisoner exchange deal that he is willing to accede to "90%" of Hamas's demands. He explains that 100 more prisoners "with blood on their hands" must be deported, while "Intifada symbols" such as Marwan Bargouti have to remain in prison. And just like the public response to Barak's colossal failure in the Camp David negotiations, which was not followed by a protest movement supporting complete withdrawal from all occupied territories, there has been no public demand to free all prisoners to their homes. Even those marching today together with Gilad's parents Aviva and Noam Shalit do not voice an unequivocal demand to pay the full price. This popular march is "a-political" – it does not state a price. It only expresses a wish, a longing, so that anyone can join.  

Who does not want peace? Who does not want Shalit back? Who wants to rule the Palestinians, anyway? The only problem is we don't have a partner – it's not that we are unwilling to pay the price of Palestinian independence. Ever since the Second Intifada and the failure of the Camp David negotiations, both right and left shy away from divisiveness – there is no true political discussion, not about peace, not about war(s), and not about Shalit. Israelis and Palestinians are trapped in an endless war, a war that will never stop unless this attitude changes.

Unlike previous prisoner exchanges, the question of Shalit's return is a political one. This is because Shalit, just like peace, is held by the Palestinians, and the Palestinians have political demands. Unlike prisoner exchanges following wars with enemies such as Egypt, Syria and the Hezbollah, the exchange required now is just another phase in a war that's expected to continue. This is the reason why two Israeli governments have refused to release prisoners "with blood on their hands". Just like the refusal to give up territory, this is motivated by calculations towards the next violent round. If the war is bound to go on, why hand over another 1000 professional and disciplined officers and men? Why give up territory that will enable them to attack Central Israel? This is vicious circle of the war discourse: since Israel can think only in terms of war, war never ends.  

In this sense, Shalit has become a weapon in Israel's propaganda war, rather than a bargaining chip between Israel and Hamas. Just like its predecessor, Netanyahu's government does not want Shalit back, but only wants to prove to the Israeli public and the entire world just how nasty Hamas is. The Israeli government does not want to recognize Hamas, but in fact does everything in its power to leave it in control of Gaza, besieged and isolated from the West Bank. Otherwise, God forbid, a partner for peace might show up, and Israel would have to pay the price. Keeping Gilad Shalit in captivity has become a peace contraceptive.

At the heart of the issue is the Israeli government's refusal to negotiate with Hamas. When the Hamas government was elected in January 2006, 50% of the Israeli public were in favor of negotiating with it, but no party publicly supported it. Ever since then, three governments have been trying to isolate Hamas internationally, and strangle it economically by a policy of blockade, which continues to this day, despite some recent concessions following the flotilla fiasco. Does this serve to topple Hamas or strengthen its control? Does this reduce the price of releasing Shalit or raise it? Shalit is the ultimate excuse for government policy: this is how the blockade was explained away, and this is how the bombing campaign of late 2008-early 2009 (Operation Cast Lead) was justified. It is only later that we become disappointed, when we discover the lie, when we understand Shalit was nothing but an excuse.

The movement in favor of Shalit's release can succeed only if it does not remain a-political. Since fear of the next war is the reason for not releasing prisoners, the protest movement must demand their release as part of a non-belligerence agreement (hudna, in Islamic discourse). Such an agreement must include the closure of tunnels currently used to smuggle arms (as well as consumer goods) into Gaza in return for a new economic settlement arranging for imports and exports, safe passage to the West Bank and opening the passages under international supervision. Only then, will the release of Gilad Shalit mark the beginning of a peace process, rather than just another prisoner exchange deal.

*  This article has been published in Hebrew by y-net on July 2 http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3913562,00.html

Dr. Grinberg is a political sociologist, author of Politics and Violence in Israel/Palestine (Routledge, 2010)