For the most part, it was a sad meeting. Tomorrow it will be five years to the day since Gilad Shalit fell into Hamas captivity. Not a single Israeli has remained indifferent to this story; there is no one who does not hope for the captured soldier's speedy return home. The only question that remains is how much the deal will cost. Two days ago, they met in a caf in Haifa, in a meeting arranged by Israel Hayom. The meeting between these men, with their conflicting opinions, was long and emotional. On one side was Rami Igra, a former Mossad official in charge of POWs and MIAs. He is firmly opposed to the Shalit deal, which he feels carries too high a price. On the other side sat Shimshon Libman, who heads the campaign to free Shalit. Libman describes the situation as a matter of life and death. Now, he says, that attempts to secure Shalit's release have failed, the choice is between values and risks. Gilad, he says, must be freed now, before he shares the fate of Ron Arad. Who's the demagogue- Rami Igra arrives first. He sits down in the caf on Mount Carmel and immediately begins speaking. I was always in favor of the release of prisoners, he says. Now I strongly oppose the Shalit deal, in its current form. I wont be able to look the families of the murdered in the eyes after mass murderers are released as part of the deal. Release at any price is a position that is neither moral nor ethical, and it means that other people will be murdered in exchange for Gilads freedom. How can I or anyone else decide whose life is more valuable- This is a strategic defeat for the country, Igra continues. We are teaching the other side that the strategy of kidnapping soldiers works, and that the most effective response to Air Force squadrons and tanks is to kidnap soldiers. Shalits family is correct in saying that Gilad cannot be made to carry the weight of the entire Jewish people on his shoulders. However, what his family demands, perhaps legitimately, is tantamount to a strategic surrender by the State of Israel. Shimshon Libman arrives a little late. He lives in Mizpe Hila, Shalits own community. He never actually knew Gilad, but when he heard about the kidnapping, he went to Noam and Aviva immediately and put himself at their disposal. I find Igras opinions very troubling, he says. They drag us down to a shallow place where Israeli society could find itself emptied of its true core, which is the risk-taking inherent in Zionism. I am the son of Holocaust survivors, I did reserve duty until the age of fifty, my brother was a high-ranking pilot in the Air Force and my son is a disabled veteran. So I am not intimidated by any ranking officer or someone who was in the Mossad twenty or thirty years ago. If the Arabs have decided that a single Jew is worth hundreds of Arabs with blood on their hands, the answer is that the single one takes precedence. For the sake of that one, for the sake of the principle of not abandoning him, in order to show that the song Ha-reut [a well-known song extolling the principle of brotherhood among soldiers IY] is more than just a song, we must carry out prisoner exchanges. From a position of strength. One question remains here: life or death, Libman continues. This is the basis of my disagreement with Rami. The system would rather see Gilad in a coffin. Once, I tried to avoid saying that. Ramis words hurt and his opinion has disastrous consequences for the integrity and the very existence of Israeli society, which draws its strength from camaraderie and the knowledge that we never abandon anyone. The state was established amid risk, people went to war amid risk. This is a question of values versus risk, Libman says. Who on earth has the right to decide that if theyre released, one thing or another will happen here? Rami and the government are playing on peoples feelings in order to scare us, [telling us]: When the prisoners go free, buses will explode. To make this kind of connection is to distort the matter. After five years, after all the leverage has collapsed, after the State of Israel has failed and we dont know where Gilad is, this is the question, and were going to decide Gilads fate. Igra cannot restrain himself. He is putting Gilads life ahead of the lives of those who will be murdered following the deal, while I prefer the ethical position that puts the many ahead of the one, he said. And thats without even talking about the results of the deal, which will strengthen those who call for Israels destruction. To claim that the choice is between Gilads life and his death is cheap demagoguery. A damaging campaign The atmosphere at the table is heavy. Igra says that Gilad is dear to him, and that he feels sad for the Shalits, but that if his own son were kidnapped, he would behave differently. I would behave in exactly the opposite way, Igra said. I wouldnt make a peep. The more this is in the headlines, the less interest Hamas has in releasing him. I would keep silent and let the wheels of justice do their work. Gilad is the child of all of us. He is just as precious to me as he is to anyone else. But his release could have negative consequences for us. The Shalit campaigns popular activities, demonstrations and marches might have made us feel better, but they were bad for Gilad. Libman acted wisely in mobilizing support - the issue is still alive. The subject is no less important to me than it is to him, but as long as we portray Gilad as an asset, they wont release him. Tactically speaking, even if it were my own son, I would keep quiet. Libman interrupts. Turning Gilad into an asset was Olmerts mistake. Instead of saying, This is what Im willing to do, he asked, What do you want- And the list hasnt changed since then. There is no doubt that Gilad has become a watershed event. He is the soldier that was left behind. If Gilad doesnt come back, that would be a disaster. It would affect my grandson. Thats how we lose our strength. Strength is not in airplanes or tanks. It has always been in the fact that every soldier knew he wouldnt be left behind. If were not careful, Gilad could suffer the fate of Ron Arad. The current leadership needs to prove that this wont happen. Igra raises another point. The vast majority of the past and present security establishment opposes the deal in its current form. No party leader supports it. Not even Sharon would carry it out, and Rabin certainly wouldnt, he says. Libman fights back. Rami speaks for the government. Thats his right, and I respect him. Quite a few senior security officials, including Ami Ayalon, Carmi Gillon, Amnon Lipkin-Shahak and Amiram Levin have expressed support for the deal, and even explained why it could be kept. This is a prisoner exchange deal. Were not giving away Jerusalem. This is a calculated risk, Libman says. "Embarrassed by the leadership" Libman talks about the suffering of Noam and Aviva. He tells of a mother who is completely cut off from her home, of a family that does not function like a family. They sit in the tent and have become a tourism and social icon, Libman says, pained. They cant allow themselves to live a normal family life. I hope very much that this will not break them apart. The Shalit family is not a hot-headed family. I admit that I told them that they needed to act with more determination, but I said all along that we were the family's support staff and that whatever they decided, we would do. I think that while the familys noble behavior has won the admiration of the masses, it has also served the lack of action by [successive] Israeli governments. I am truly ashamed of my leaders. On Independence Day, I chose not to fly the flag. If we lose here, well be like the armies of our neighbors, where human life is cheap. Libman addresses the criticism against him. I also listen to what the bereaved families have to say, he says. I have no quarrel with them. I only ask that they try to give human life a higher priority than feeling of revenge. Igra recounts: A mother called me. One of her sons had been killed in the line of duty. She told me that she would be willing to sacrifice another son for Shalit, but not like this, not at such a price, not in this deal. I dont oppose prisoner exchanges. But I cant support a proposal like this because it amounts to surrender. Libman smiles. The phrase We all support [Shalit's] release sounds like a nice line for a film, but we could end up waiting another five years. In Shalits case, there has been an enormous weakness in leadership. The family in Itamar was murdered by two men who didnt have blood on their hands. If dont carry out terrorist attacks, it's because we have good control over the territory. Maybe in September A moment before they go their separate ways, a moment of agreement. I want to turn on a light at the end of the tunnel, Igra says. The Palestinians will release Gilad because of a political situation. We can assume that as September approaches, contacts between the two side will resume and Hamas will have an interest in looking better. It will want to do this for its public relations and for its partnership with the Palestinian Authority. I dont rule that out, Libman answers. Conditions and events might come about at the international level, might include Gilad. Perhaps then it will be easier for the government to portray it as a gesture. It could be in September, and I say that it could be now as well. We need to act. We need to bring Gilad home.
