June 25th 2006 was a Sunday. I watched the England v Ecuador world cup game. My best friend stayed over for the weekend. I worried about finishing a personal statement for my university application. Gilad Shalit was captured by Hamas militants in a cross-border raid.
Today he was released, five years and almost four months later - a total of 1941 days in captivity during which he was deprived of International Red Cross medical care and visits, contravening the Geneva Convention.
The conditions of his release have meant that 1,027 Hamas and Palestinian prisoners will be released from Israeli prisons. My eyes have brimmed with tears of joy at the thought and sight of families reunited and homes rebuilt - whatever the background of those involved. Humans are humans, sons are sons, mothers are mothers.
But I have been following the BBC's coverage of this long-awaited event and some of the readers' comments that they have chosen to publish on their live feed have bewildered me. There is so much to say today, so many coins with so many sides, but here I will reply to an apparent misunderstanding in the nature of this prisoner swap.
The Middle East is a conflict which runs deep in many veins and on which few agree. Nabeel from Gaza, in a comment published on the BBC live feed, said that he is "deeply saddened for the 5,500 prisoners who remain in Israeli prisons" and believes that this "disgraceful" swap deal serves the Israelis better than the "disappointed Palestinians".
Faysal Mikdadi from Dorchester similarly wrote, "As a Palestininan, I am saddened that there is a perception that one Israeli prisoner is worth 1,000 Palestinians. This is a typical construct manufactured by Israel... Why shouldn't [the released prisoners] go home to Palestine as they are entitled to do under all legal and international norms?"
Abdullah Obeidat from Jordan, on the other hand, commented that "Some Palestinians were in Israeli prisons much longer than Shalit. I'm glad Shalit is out but more than happy as it is a triumph for Hamas over the Israeli government. 1000+ Palestinian prisoners for one Israeli prisoner is indeed an astounding victory."
Astounding indeed. To the people who think that there is common ground between the abduction of Gilad Shalit and the imprisonment of most of these Palestinians, read on.
Gilad Shalit was kidnapped and kept in contravention to the Geneva Convention for over five years. He was not arrested by the police under suspicion of committing a crime. He was not tried. He was not found guilty. He was not serving a prison sentence.
On the other hand, a number of the 1,027 Palestinian prisoners being released have been convicted of heinous crime. One is Ahlam Tamimi who was found guilty of involvement in the bombing of Sbarro pizzeria in 2001, in which 15 people were killed. According to Frimet Roth, the mother of 15 year old Malka who was killed in this terrorist attack, Tamimi said in an interview while in prison that "she was not sorry and had no regrets for what she did. When she was asked if she'd do it again, she said she would."
Yehia Ibrahim Al-Sinwar was convicted for his involvement in the kidnapping and murder of IDF soldier Nachshon Waxman, and for the murders of two Palestinian Authority Arab men who were thought to be cooperating with Israel. Sanwar was given five life sentences. He was on the list for release.
Walid Anajas was sentenced to 36 life sentences for participation in the Café Moment bombing of 2002, killing 11 and wounding 54, and a terror attack in Rishon Lezion. He was on the list for release.
Abed Alaziz Salaha, the man showing off his hands stained with blood from the lynching of Vadim Norzich in the famous photo that has become emblematic of the second intifada was sentenced to life imprisonment. He was on the list for release.
I could go on. Other prisoners wanted for release include Mohammed Shratkha, responsible for two counts of kidnapping and murder, who was sentenced to three life sentences; Ibrahim Shammasina, participant in the murders of two teenagers, a taxi driver and an IDF soldier; Fatkhi Abu-Sheikh, organiser of the Netanya Park Hotel suicide bombing in which 30 civilians were murdered and 140 wounded, who was given 29 life sentences six and a half years ago; Abbas el-Said, head of Hamas in Tulkarem and initiator of the bombings at the Park Hotel and the Netanya Sharon Mall, who has served six and a half years of his sentence of 35 lifetimes plus 50 years in prison; and Atiya Mohammed Warda, planner of three suicide bomb attacks in which 46 civilians were killed and dozens wounded.
It hardly seems appropriate to mention Gilad Shalit's name in the same breath as these convicted criminals.
So no, BBC reader Faysal Mikdadi. A prisoner swap of this nature is not an international norm, and the idea that one Israeli soldier is "worth" 1,000 Palestinians is not a typical construct manufactured by Israel. It is the unfortunate length that Israel must to go in its refusal to leave any man behind, even though it sets a precedent, even though it makes a mockery of the justice system, and even though it poses a great security risk to Israel. And that is why the released prisoners are not able to return to their lives as they knew them before arrest, because the ones who are being deported are convicted terrorists and murderers who were fairly tried and found guilty of killing civilians. They are not being acquitted of their crimes. They are being released from prison, as demanded, for the safe-return of a kidnapped soldier.
Follow Lauren Davidson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/laurendavidson
Shalit was a member of the IDF indeed, but he was kidnapped on Israeli territory. Even if you believe that that Israeli territory shouldn't be Israeli territory, he should surely be detained according to UN human rights standards - which he was not.
It is an insult to the Palestinian resistance to say that these prisoners 'only committed the crime of resisting the occupation'. Many did far more than that.
I think the article neglects an important point - that as well as the Palestinians convicted fairly of heinous crimes, Palestinians who were convicted of much lesser crimes, and spuriously, were still imprisoned, and have still been denied the right to return to their homes. Indeed, two of the female prisoners refused release to Gaza, since they are citizens of the West Bank and would end up stranded separated from their families.
That noted, the general thrust of this piece is fair. Whether you agree with Israel's general actions in its backyard or not (and I most certainly do not), Gilad Shalit was wrongfully detained, and no one has suggested that he was personally responsible for crimes such as those committed by some of the Palestinians released. Gilad Shalit should not be made a martyr for Israel; he should not suffer for her sins.
This is not a propaganda victory for either side - it is a messy fudge.
Another nuance that will not be commented upon in the media is that among the released murderers are Palestinian Arabs which is simply mind boggling. How can it be that the Israeli government will pardon its own citizens? Has Hamas now become a legitimate representative of Palestinian Israelis? Also if the most extreme government in Israeli history can agree with Hamas on a prisoner swap then why can't it negotiate with them over other issues?
The Shalit deal raises more questions than it resolves and these need to be addressed as well. It might also be worth mentioning that anyone who is in favour of a two-state solution must also be in favour of the release of nearly all the Palestinian prisoners as part of any final settlement (just like the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland).
Factual, strong, honest, concise would be the way to describe your commentary. Know that I have shared in various venues. I look forward to more of your writing.
Thank you!
oh and I'm your #1 fan :)
One problem that you seem to be aware of yet choose to ignore is visible when you say 'a number of the 1,027 Palestinian prisoners being released have been convicted of heinous crime'.
What about those prisoners who were kept by Israel without charge, like Gilad Shalit? Except here there were a lot more of them, kept for a lot longer, and they weren't even soldiers. Surely this is a lot worse.