Last week, after five years of painful custody, Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit was returned home by Hamas as part of Israel’s agreement to release more than 1,000 Palestinian prisoners.
The news reverberated throughout blogs, articles and Facebook status updates around the world. It brought an end to a half-decade ordeal that has recently led to many late nights of nervous pressure for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
But putting aside the guest columns, the condemnations by writers such as Alan Dershowitz — who stated this trade justified the “cruel arithmetic of death” — and the endless back-and-forths over whether Israel made the right decision, the inevitable truth is this trade emphasizes the extraordinary gumption of one nation to go to the world’s end for the sake of a single life.
Therefore, the unseen gain underlies why I think Israel’s move was the proper choice.
Let’s consider Schalit. This young soldier became the face of his country and the next generation’s reason to become advocates for the cause. For many Israelis and champions of peace around the world, his release was the culmination of years of emotional investment.
Furthermore, this trade reassured the confidence and national zeal of Israeli soldiers who now know their lives, in the eyes of their country, are invaluable. This trade created a world perception of Israel that accentuated the idea of what Los Angeles Rabbi Sharon Brous called “letting love dictate policy.”
As controversial, paradoxical and unstable as many have said this trade was, it was unavoidable. In contrast to how Hamas views the lives of its constituents — as people whose deaths through suicidal martyrdom should be celebrated — Israel was not going to let one honest, naive young soldier wither away in confinement. The price was going to be paid and it was going to be large. It was only a matter of time.
Indeed, Palestinian supporters garnered another perception of Israel’s value for life, and surely, the trade benefited them, as well. Many of those prisoners who returned home were also greeted by jubilant, emotional family members crying tears of joy.
But unfortunately, for the segment of that population primarily focused on military operations, this trade was likewise a justification for their terrorism. Many prisoners who were unsuccessful in their suicide-bombing attempts vowed to continue pursuing their childhood aspirations to sacrifice their lives. Several Hamas leaders called for the capture of more soldiers like Schalit to be used as bargaining chips. On that note, thinking about the future safety of Israeli troops’ is extremely unsettling. Additionally, we’re presented with the worry of if and when these freed prisoners will carry out further attacks against Israel.
I feel as though the Schalit saga is akin to witnessing a beautiful, clear blue sky with birds’ faint twitters in the background while visiting a Nazi death camp. It’s similar to attending a wedding the day after having been to a funeral. This trade relays the reality of life’s often ironic juxtaposing of the bittersweet — that confusing intake of joy and happiness — combined with distress, anger and a question about life’s impartiality.
Schalit’s return was a victory for Israel, but it was undoubtedly a Pyrrhic one. However, since the value of one life — of watching a father hug his son — is priceless, this trade was, at least in my opinion, a correct one. Whether such an investment on Israel’s part was truly worth it is a question that only time can answer.
Ariel Dosetareh is a freshman Jewish studies major. He can be reached at dosetareh@umdbk.com.
