Releasing Palestinian prisoners is a political blunder
Releasing Palestinian prisoners won't help peace and can easily be seen as a gratuitous insult to the victims and their families who still suffer from the murder of their loved ones by terrorists
Prime Ministers in democratic countries frequently have the occupational hazard of having to make difficult and unpleasant decisions. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has for over a year been confronted by the dilemma of making such decisions and concessions to the Palestinians in order to get them to come to peace talks, brokered by the United States, that were to be renewed last year.
Those conditions were said to be part of the Palestinian conditions for reviving peace talks with Israel. The concessions were made in July of last year when the Israeli government agreed to release 104 Palestinian prisoners in four stages as the price to be paid for Palestinians to enter peace talks.
The government decision was upheld and approved by the Israeli Supreme Court in October 2013 after an organization of the bereaved Israeli families had challenged the government decision .
The first 26 prisoners were released in August 2012; the second 26 were released on October 30, 2013. All of the latter 26, 21 of whom come from the West Bank and 5 from the Gaza Strip, have been convicted of murder or attempted murder. All the offences, many of which were brutal attacks on Israelis, were committed before the 1993 Oslo Accords, and the prisoners have served between 19-28 years in prison.
The prisoner serving the longest time is an individual who murdered 2 Israeli university students while they were hiking south of Jerusalem in 1984.
One can understand that the release of the second batch of prisoners is another good will gesture by Netanyahu to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, and one partly due to pressure by the Obama Administration. It is also understandable, and commendable in an abstract way, that Netanyahu insists on honoring government decisions and commitments he made.
The Israeli government has the power to decide to release the prisoners, and the decision does not require parliamentary approval. The decision, in addition to causing anguish and anger for the bereaved Israeli families, has also divided political leaders inside and outside the government coalition.
Naftali Bennett, chairman of the Jewish Home Party and Minister for the Economy and Trade has opposed the decision, while Tzipi Livni, Justice Minister, and her Hatnauh party support it. One can understand that the decision is part of complex international politics in which Israel is involved.
Yet, in view of the political division in the country it is difficult to accept the position that the decision is part of a long term strategy, as Netanyahu has claimed, that will be successful.
A number of issues can be raised. First is that the release of the prisoners is a gratuitous insult to the victims and their families who still suffer from the murder of their loved ones by terrorists. What is noticeable is the absence of any statement by President Abbas or any other Palestinian leader, whether a potential participant in negotiations or not, of regret or apology for the behavior of the murderers.
Certainly this is not to be expected from the leaders of Hamas. It seems improbable that those prisoners are likely to be punished in any way for their murders. It is much more likely they will be treated as heroes and greeted with welcoming ceremonies. It is equally likely that the five going back to Hamas and the Gaza Strip will return to violence and engage in more terrorist activities.
Clearly, the released terrorists have not renounced their past, nor made any promise not to commit future terrorist acts. Israel has already been made aware of this problem. In December 2011 it released 1,027 prisoners in return for the release of Gilad Shalit, the IDF soldier who had been kidnapped by Hamas. It is known that some of those released resumed terrorist activity.
It is improbable that releasing the prisoners will help forward the peace process or have any connection with it. One may ask which other country has released terrorists to appease terrorist countries or groups. In spite of the professed desire of President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder to close it down, the Guantanamo Bay camp remains as the place of detention of terrorists or suspected terrorists.
None of the more than 250 detainees have been released. It was always a fantasy to think, as Holder believed, that real benefits would flow from the closure of the Guantanamo facility.
Most important is the refusal of the Palestinian Authority to enter into peace talks without concessions by Israel and the setting of preconditions. It cannot be sufficiently stated that the stumbling block for any peace settlement is the refusal by the Palestinians, and still some of the Arab states, to accept the existence and legitimacy of he Jewish State of Israel.
The release of the prisoners is not in consonance with a forthright declaration of this kind. No peace is possible without such a declaration. The release of the prisoners is not a crime, but it is a political blunder.
Michael Curtis, author of "Jews, Antisemitism, and the Middle East", is Distinguished Professor Emeritus in political science at Rutgers University. Curtis, the author of 30 books, is widely respected as an authority on the Middle East
We are wholly dependent on the kindness of our readers for our continued work. We thank you in advance for any support you can offer.