By Chaim Avraham

Saturday afternoon, October 7, 2000, five months after the IDF left southern Lebanon. A soft knock at the door. My wife Edna opens the door to find an officer and two accompanying soldiers. She immediately asks: “What’s happened to our son?” He isn’t injured or killed – he’s just been kidnapped. From that day on, our life became a living hell, and everyone knows how the affair ended. With all my heart, I hoped that my son Abraham, and his friends Omar Suwad and Adi Avitan, may their memories be a blessing, would be the last soldiers to die in combat. My hope did not come true. Today, as Gilad Shalit, Ehud Goldwasser, and Eldad Regev are held by terror organizations, the feelings of horror have returned as if it were all happening to us again – the anxiety, the pain, and the lack of knowledge about what has happened to our loved ones.

For three and a half years, Hizbullah refused to provide any information about what had happened to the soldiers, torturing the families with ambiguous information that served only to exacerbate their pain. Humanitarian organizations, heads of state, parliamentarians from around the world, and moral figures were all unable to find a solution for the kidnappings. After protracted negotiations through German mediators, and headed on the Israeli side by General (ret.) Ilan Biran, the soldiers were returned from their captivity in Lebanon.

For eighteen years, Israel wallowed in the mud of Lebanon, a country torn from the inside and controlled by groups that vie for control of the regional drug market, with the encouragement of Iran and Syria – countries that have been called the “axis of evil” of global terror. During the years the IDF was in Lebanon, soldiers were kidnapped on several occasions in order to serve as bargaining chips. Tough negotiations with the terror organizations were always needed in order to free the soldiers, and this objective was achieved at the price of freeing terrorists.

Everyone is aware that freeing terrorists who have committed serious crimes damages Israel’s deterrence and objectives. The question is, however, whether there is any other way to bring our boys home? We must not forget that the soldiers are sent on missions by the state, and our moral obligation to them is a supreme value in a society that has been fighting for its very existence for over a century.

As soldiers leave on a mission, highly motivated and determined to do whatever is asked of them, they must be confident that the nation’s leaders and the public will support them whatever dangers emerge. They must know that they will be freed safe and sound. A society that believes that its way is just, based on its values and faith, must draw from the well from which we find this faith, examine it, and learn that the redemption of prisoners is a primary value. Maimonides says: “There is no greater commandment than redeeming prisoners, since the prisoner is among the hungry, thirsty, and naked and faces a mortal danger.” In Jewish tradition, captivity is considered the hardest situation of all. Someone who delays releasing a prisoner by even one hour is considered to have shed blood. For the sake of freeing prisoners, one may even use money allocated for charity or for the construction of a synagogue; one may even sell a Torah scroll.

Behind all our captured and missing soldiers, including Zachariah Baumel, Yehuda Katz, Zvi Feldman, Ron Arad, and Guy Hever, there are anxious, grieving families who do not know what has become of their sons, who are also our sons, and who await their speedy return home. Our actions must be cautious and considered. We must avoid the traps set by the terror organizations and steer clear of the pitfalls that emerge during the negotiations. We must avoid destroying our deterrent capability. Yet despite all this – redeeming prisoners is a supreme value.

By Meir Indor

The numbers speak for themselves. Eight percent of terrorists released from prison resume their terror activities. Fourteen suicide attacks were carried out by released terrorists. The two terrorists who killed a Jewish woman who believed in peace and worked as a translator in East Jerusalem were released in the Jibril deal, in which 1,160 terrorists were set free, including master terrorists such as Kozo Akumoto. The mother of Yoske Grop, who was taken prisoner, received her son back home, along with four other prisoners, after a strong and well-publicized campaign against the authorities at all levels. Hundreds of people then paid for this through the deaths and injuries caused after these same terrorists organized the first intifada and formed the organizational infrastructure for the massive waves of terror that followed the Oslo accords. When Nasrallah said that we are a society of cobwebs, part of what he meant was that we do not stick to the law. Terrorists are regularly released, and the opinion of one mother can change the whole way we act. Was the price worth paying?

Since Elhanan Tannenbaum was released, the number of kidnappings has increased, Since Israel returned live terrorists in return for bodies, bodies have also become a business commodity in Lebanon. As soon as a deal was closed with Nasrallah for the return of bodies for terrorists, he began to speak of further kidnappings. The writing was on the wall before the deal was closed, but people asked us – activists in Almagor, bereaved and injured victims of terror – how anyone could dare look into the eyes of the parents of kidnapped soldiers.

The time has now come to ask: who can dare look into the eyes of the families struck by terror and affected by the latest kidnappings? Who can dare look into the eyes of those citizens, and we do not yet know who they are, who will be walking on the street and suddenly become the victims of more kidnappings and terror attacks? Who can dare look into the eyes of the parents who children were murdered when they see the murderers being released from jail, signing V for victory with their fingers, smiling and embracing their families – while their own loved ones are buried in the ground?

Even the modern legislature has realized that in order to rehabilitate victims, justice must be seen to be done. In the Victims of Offense Law, victims are allowed to appear before the court and present arguments relating to the severity of the punishment, as well as to monitor its implementation. Everyone realizes that, as part of the psychological rehabilitation of victims, they must see that the offender is bearing the punishment for their actions. The ancient law of the Torah also has a similar status – that of the “redeemer of blood,” which enabled and legitimized the possibility for relatives to demand punishment from those who had harmed their loved ones. The desire for justice is reflected in the Book of Exodus in the commandment “You shall not defile the land which you inhabit,” meaning: the earth cannot stand to see innocent blood shed, and society must punish those who have caused injury; even if the offender is extremely rich, they cannot buy immunity from punishment. Accordingly, it is unthinkable that Israeli society can release those who commit offenses because of further acts of violence committed by them or their friends, even if they are Arab.

Things were not always like this. The late Professor Yuval Neeman once told me that while he served as the deputy head of the Intelligence Corps, Israeli soldiers were held by the enemy. He did not receive the captives’ parents for discussions, in order to avoid submitting to emotional pressure. After some time, the prisoners were released, without surrendering to pressure, after Israel launched counter operations to capture prisoners. There was another Jew who did not submit to pressure, but he paid for his liberty with his life. The Maharam of Rotenberg, the leader of European Jewry in the period 1215-1293, was captured and imprisoned, and an enormous ransom was demanded for his release. Although the Jews cooperated to raise the sum, the Maharam ruled that he should not be released, since he assumed that his release under these circumstances would lead to further kidnappings. He died in prison, and legend tells that he ordered that his body not be redeemed even after his death, on the basis of the same principle. Again the important principle of redeeming prisoners, he placed a price tag that states that we should not pay more than the due amount – an ancient Talmudic principle established during a period when kidnappings and ransoms were widespread.

In the current period, when parents send their children to fight, and sometimes to be killed or injured, in battles with four terrorists, it takes more than stupidity to release hundreds of terrorists. Who will be willing to send soldiers into battle if hundreds of terrorists caught after great effort and sacrifice are released to the cheers of the terror organizations?