Why a conscription army is different

For one rare moment on Tuesday, Israel went back to being itself: naive, shy, restrained and sympathetic. Just like the person that caused it to be all of these things - Gilad Shalit. Sociologists will probably spend years wondering how one young man made an entire country pray for his welfare, biting its nails waiting to see his picture, to hear him speak, for his embrace with his mother. How is it that this quiet, introverted soldier had millions glued to their televisions, eager for any piece of information?

Over the next few days, we will learn more about what he went through while in captivity, and at home. Our curiosity will not be satisfied, despite the fact that what we got on Tuesday was significantly more than anything we could have asked for: plenty of pictures proving that he is relatively healthy, both mentally and physically, and an interview that showed his impressive mental strength, which stands in stark contrast to his physical fragility.

Get the Israel Hayom newsletter sent to your mailbox!

These scenes, and their moving culmination in his return home, were a happy ending to a difficult journey, Gilad's and ours. Along the way, Israel discovered many principles and forfeited others. Much has been written about these, and more is yet to be written. One point was missed along the way: the difference between Israel and other countries, which do not "capitulate" to terrorism, is that conscription here is mandatory. In the U.S. or England, being a soldier is a profession, and whoever chooses it knows that he is taking a risk, such as not being released from captivity. In Israel, everyone has to serve, and thus the responsibility is different: We will serve without hesitation, and the state will take care of us without hesitation.

And still, the day after requires all of us to stop and think. First of all, the professionals, the IDF and mainly the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet), who for over five years failed to collect information that could lead to an operation to rescue the captive soldier, held only kilometers from home; teams of negotiators, who could not find a way to end the affair earlier and with a better deal; and the government, which nixed many creative options (kidnappings, assassinations, etc.) which could perhaps have changed the way things played out.

The lessons of all these will be applied to the next kidnappings, which are already being hatched in Gaza. On the tactical level, the change has already taken place: soldiers are now being directed to prevent future abductions using all available means (even at the price of killing the abducted - the so-called Hannibal Protocol). On the operative level, Israel needs to find the most efficient way to deter, and respond, to abductions of soldiers. On the strategic level, we need to think about enemies and friends, and whom we would like to strengthen for the sake of our future here. While we're at it, let's also discuss the social contract that holds us together, its cost, and its strengths and weaknesses. There are plenty of both, and we cannot avoid dealing with all of them.

On Tuesday, however, one feeling united everyone who followed Gilad through the whole ordeal, beginning with his abduction near Kerem Shalom and ending at his home in Mitzpe Hila: pride in being Israeli.

The writer is Channel One's military affairs commentator.

Like our newsletter? 'Like' our Facebook page!

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו