BY RANDY GOLDSTEIN

In print | Published November 13, 2003

Earlier this week, Prime Minster Ariel Sharon’s cabinet narrowly approved an agreement with Hezbollah to release hundreds of Arab prisoners in exchange for one kidnapped Israeli and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers. This deal, if carried out, will be Israel’s largest prisoner exchange with an Arab entity in nearly 20 years. It will also be a demonstration of weakness to the Arab world and a boon to Hezbollah and its fellow terrorist factions.

Three years ago, Hezbollah captured Elhanan Tannen-baum by luring him into a fake business deal with Arab businessmen. He has since been held hostage in Lebanon and used as a bargaining chip in the current prisoner exchange proposal. Offering Tannenbaum and the bodies of three Israeli soldiers, Hezbollah has demanded that the Israeli cabinet release 400 Palestinian prisoners and several dozen prisoners from other Arab nations.

Regardless of the Israeli reaction to this proposal, it seems prudent to examine Hezbollah’s request first. Having captured Tannenbaum, a noncombatant, Hezbollah now expects the release of hundreds of Arab prisoners. The magnitude of this trade evokes a question of what value Hezbollah puts on the prisoners themselves. Surely the exchange of a dozen Arab prisoners for a single Israeli would be more than fair in any sense of the word. By requiring the release of so many, Hezbollah demonstrates less regard for these prisoners themselves than the Israeli weakness their release may reveal to the world.

Sadly, this lopsided exchange is not without precedent. Since declaring independence in 1948, Israel has repeatedly exchanged batches of hundreds or thousands of Arab prisoners in return for only a handful of Israelis or Israeli bodies. In the most recent such occurrence, Israel released 1,150 prisoners in 1985 in exchange for three soldiers who were captured in the 1982 conflict in Lebanon. While the appropriateness of this exchange may be questioned, it at least took place at a point in time in which terrorism against Israel was a small fraction of what it has been recently. Though the proposed prisoner exchange with Hezbollah is not the first of its kind, it is a completely inappropriate decision given the level of violence in the region.

It may be commendable for Israel to make a goodwill gesture, but this is not the one to make. If the capture of one Israeli can be used to free a small army of Arab prisoners, what incentive will there be for Hezbollah — in addition to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the like — not to use similar tactics in the future? Rather than take actions to make Hezbollah reconsider future kidnappings, Israel will demonstrate that there are effective paths to weakening Israeli resolve.

This exchange is perhaps most troubling because, unlike past exchanges which have for the most part been with specific countries, Israel will release Arab prisoners at the behest of a terrorist organization. Hezbollah is not a sovereign nation. It is a Syrian-sponsored terrorist group, recognized by the United States as such that has occupied Lebanon since the end of the Lebanese civil war in 1991.

Thankfully, there still exists the possibility that this prisoner exchange will not occur. Hezbollah leadership has said that the exchange must include Samir Kantar, a Lebanese militant who murdered an Israeli man and his two children in the 1970s. It seems curious that the release of over 400 prisoners absent Kantar would not be sufficient for the release of Tannenbaum. One hopes these detained Arabs realize Hezbollah is not simply performing a friendly gesture. For the moment Israel seems resolved not to release Kantar or any Arab prisoners responsible for the murder of Israeli civilians.

The Israeli decision not to release these most contemptible murderers is sensible, yet the larger decision to engage in this prisoner exchange is still an irresponsible one. If Arab attitudes toward Israel are to change, as they must before this conflict can end, it is a dangerous move for Israel to engage in any actions that could cause its neighbors to question its regional influence. Conceding this exchange to Hezbollah will not placate that group’s aggression or mollify its anti-Israel attitude. Rather, Hezbollah will have identified and will exploit a very real Israeli weakness. If Israel is to survive among its hostile neighbors, expressing vulnerability for the sake of a businessman and three bodies demonstrates a weakness that, if consistent, is incompatible with that survival.

Randy Goldstein is a junior. You can contact him at rgoldst1@swarthmore.edu.

« RETURN TO OPINIONS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »