
Who doesn't want all of our hostages returned home? We all do!
But ask yourself this:
On what authority does any government send individuals into war, knowing that some won't come home? Because, a State's first and primary responsibility is the collective community, not individuals!!
Does negotiating with avowed terrorists hurt or help the collective?
Sorry for the painful truth. Read and weep.
Israel’s current ‘terrorists-for-hostage’ deal is bittersweet, joy mixed with serious misgivings. Jewish Law is not so ambiguous: “Captives should not be ransomed for more than their value, for the sake of the general welfare.” (Maimonides) Unfortunately, such a law was necessary, lest kidnapping become a lucrative trade.
But what if the captors threatened murder; or if the hostage was of extreme importance to the community? Such nuances were not lost on the codifiers.
Case in point: Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg (1215-1293) was imprisoned by the Emperor Rudolf. Since most of the Rabbis then were his disciples, Rabbi Meir’s countless students were prepared to pay any amount, arguing that all were in need of his guidance. But Rabbi Meir posited that this would only encourage more abductions. The result: he died in prison.
Note: These two views are only valid in times of peace. In war it is forbidden to submit to extortion. In fact, Judaism’s response of military force is based on a clear Biblical passage (Num. 21) that Jews go to battle for even a single hostage. Otherwise, we incentivize the enemy. Ditto for the women taken from Ziklag for whom King David went to war. (Sam. 1:30)
Our present situation is actually worse.
A) If the State frees an inordinate amount for each Israeli, the terrorists figure that even if they do get caught, most will eventually be freed.
B) The terrorists simply return to their murderous activities and kill more innocents.
C) Our weakness actually emboldens terrorists by rewarding their evil.
Here is a comparable situation. In 1993, American pilot Michael Durant was captured in Mogadishu, Somalia, The U.S. Ambassador sent this blunt message: “I guarantee we are not going to pay or trade…we have to rescue him…there's going to be a fight. [Then] all restraint goes…this pent-up anger is going to be released. [Everything] will be destroyed, men, women, children, camels, cats, dogs...everything.” Durant was unconditionally released the next day.
This used to be the Israeli position as well. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, members of the Israeli team were taken hostage by the Palestinian Arab group, Black September, demanding 234 jailed Palestinian Arabs be released. Israel’s response was absolute: there would be no negotiation. The world’s democracies concurred.
Of course, let us not forget Operation Entebbe (1976) where terrorists threatened murder. As a consequence, IDF commandos flew 2,500 miles to Uganda and rescued 102 hostages. That resoluteness instilled fear in the hearts of our enemies for years to come.
But in 1979 that policy was broken when Israel and the PLO exchanged one Israeli soldier for 70 terrorists. Six years later, the price had gone up. 1,150 prisoners for just 3 abducted Israeli soldiers. Israel’s current readiness to swap includes even soldiers in body bags. Recall Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. For high drama, nothing equals the release of 1,027 Arab prisoners for one Gilad Shalit. At the time, Israelis were bitterly divided. Imagine how Jews felt seeing Arabs waving Hamas flags and diabolically chanting, “We want a new Gilad Shalit.”
But military action is not always an option. Hence the Talmud relates numerous stories about righteous individuals ransoming captives for ‘crazy’ money. In medieval times, many Jewish communities in port cities raised funds to rescue Jews captured by pirates. This mitzvah to redeem captives (Pidyon Shevuyim) is extolled by Maimonides: This takes precedence over feeding and clothing the poor. Indeed, there is no religious duty more meritorious for the Torah warns, “Neither shall you stand idly by the blood of your neighbor.” (Lev. 19)
Regardless, none of these events or rulings contradict our earlier stance as they all occurred when Jews were stateless, exiled and powerless.
How then is a captive’s exchange rate evaluated? Most say this refers to a person’s value on the slave market. Other mark the ‘going-rate’ as it exists in the general population. In other words, how much a non-Jewish country would be charged if one of theirs was taken captive.
One precedent: in 1969 Britain exchanged two spies for one British subject held in the Soviet Union. Other examples include Soviet spy Rudolf Abel for U2 pilot Gary Powers, and Gordon Lonsdale for Greville Wynne. While paying the ‘going-rate’ would not stop all future kidnappings, it would ensure that Jews are not targeted more than others. Hence, Somali pirates are not picky about the nationality of the ships they hijack.
At the time of Israel’s first prisoner swap in 1979, the Lubavitcher Rebbe vociferously protested that the Halakhic issue was not saving a life, but the threat to national security. Israel, he declared, was sending the wrong message to their enemies that there were no red lines, and that if you push hard and long enough, you get what you want. Thus, releasing a terrorist grants validity to terrorism as a means to achieve political goals and creates a direct threat to every Israeli.
One exception to this occurs at the end of a war. When a lasting and final ceasefire agreement is reached, then Israel may release all of their enemy prisoners in return for all of theirs held. This is even if we have many more captives. The reason is simple: at the end of a protracted war such exchanges are recognized as accepted practice. As such, they are not considered extortion.
More important: the released enemy will no longer be a threat. Unfortunately, most Israelis and clear-thinking people in the world of realpolitik (politics based on practical rather than ideological considerations) do not believe this bad deal will convince our enemies to lay down their weapons.
Can that ever happen? It must. So we’ve been promised, and so we believe. But it won’t arrive because of our perceived weakness in negotiations, but because of our actual strength in war.
Rabbi Yossie Denburg is Co-Director of Chabad of Boca Raton