Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Freeing Prisoners, at a Price

The Israeli government's decision to release over 100 long-serving Palestinian prisoners, many of whom are considered terrorists, has evoked complex feelings among Israelis.

Inter Press Service

Standing in front of the makeshift memorial corner of his deceased children that he arranged in the room, Tzion Swery says to himself, “How ironical that we mark the 12th anniversary of their death on Tuesday just as Israel starts releasing Palestinian prisoners.”

The Israeli government’s decision to free 104 long-serving Palestinian and Palestinian-Israeli prisoners, whom it calls “terrorists” because they took part in attacks which killed Israelis, coincides with the resumption of peace talks, revived after a three-year hiatus.

The phased release of prisoners sentenced for life prior to the Oslo Accords of September 1993 was approved to the dismay of the victims’ families.

In the historic agreement signed 20 years ago by former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin and former Palestine Liberation Organisation chairman Yasser Arafat, both Israel and the PLO agreed to “recognise their mutual legitimate and political rights” and negotiate a two-state solution to their conflict. The accords never materialised into a final peace agreement.

The newly-resumed talks intend on finishing what the Oslo Accords started. Following the release of a first batch of 26 veteran prisoners, a second round of negotiations was set to begin in Jerusalem and in the West Bank town Jericho.

The rest of the 104 prisoners will be set free in three additional stages, conditional on progress made during the nine months allocated for the talks, which officially began in Washington on July 30.

“We put our trust in the political and judicial systems that these murderers never see the light of day,” protests Swery. “Releasing them is as if they killed our children twice.”

Swery has been in mourning for the past 12 years. In August 2001, at the height of the second Palestinian Intifadah uprising, his son Doron, his daughter Sharon and his son-in-law Yaniv Ben-Shalom were killed in a drive-by shooting on an occupied West Bank road.

His granddaughters Shahar and Efrat, then three months and one year old, survived the attack. His daughter, their mother, protected them with her body. The perpetrators were caught and sentenced to consecutive life imprisonments.

The men convicted of killing his family are not listed for release.

Not all parents think as Swery does. “Arik was 19 years old, a lovely boy who smiled all the time,” said Yitzhak Frankenthal, bereaved father of a soldier.

Arik Frankenthal was kidnapped and killed by Hamas militants while hitchhiking his way home from his base in July 1994.

Nineteen years on, still coping with the loss of his son, Frankenthal leads an organisation of Israeli and Palestinian bereaved parents determined to work together for the sake of reconciliation, tolerance and peace.

“We need to overcome the psychological barriers of fear, hatred, mistrust, ignorance, and to push both governments to make peace,” he says. 

“If the same people who sent these prisoners against Israel now talk with Israel, the prisoners shouldn’t continue to be in jail,” former Palestinian peace negotiator Ziad Abu Zayyad tells IPS.

According to the Israeli human rights organisation B’Tselem, more than 6,000 Palestinians are currently in Israeli jails. They represent one of the most painful issues of the conflict, not only for Israelis.

“Each prisoner has also a family, a community, and many people are involved emotionally,” Abu Zayyad points out.

For the Palestinians, they are “freedom fighters” resisting the Israeli occupation – for them, the worst form of terror. Their release is a long-standing demand.

“This cycle of bloodshed must stop. Releasing prisoners gives a signal to the Palestinian people that the Israeli government is serious, and thus helps create a better climate for the negotiations,” stresses Abu Zayyad.

The issue pits not just Palestinians against Israelis but Israeli families against one another.

“If releasing murderers is a condition for peace, then this isn’t peace at all,” objects Swery.

“I lost Arik precisely because there’s no peace between us and the Palestinians,” says Frankenthal.

“Unfortunately, the only language that we Israelis understand is the language of force, of power,” Frankenthal adds. “If there’s no terror, no need to talk with the Palestinians; if there’s terror, why want to talk? It’s a catch 22 situation.”

Frankenthal points at the powerful solidarity campaign organised by segments of Israel’s civil society for the release of soldier Gilad Shalit who was abducted in 2006 by the Islamist resistance movement Hamas.

After more than five years in captivity, Shalit was exchanged for more than 1,000 prisoners.

“Palestinians who fight soldiers are real soldiers. Releasing them is legitimate,” acknowledges Swery, “Just like when armies exchange prisoners. But these particular prisoners are murderers.”

The prisoners who will be released in four batches starting Tuesday took part in attacks that killed Israelis prior to the Oslo Accords in 1993.

“What’s the difference between a Palestinian fighter – in our point of view a terrorist – who puts a bomb in a cafe and kills 10-15 people, and an Israeli pilot who bombs Gaza City and kills 10-15 Palestinians?” retorts Frankenthal.

Whether they are “terrorists with blood on their hands” or “freedom fighters” or both, Palestinian prisoners conjure up all the elemental emotions which Israelis and Palestinians grapple with in their inextricable conflict – fear and blame, hatred and revenge, crime and punishment, loss and grief.

Whether terror is inflicted by Palestinians or by the Israeli occupation, neither side can forgive or forget – even the most committed peace lovers.

“Only god can forgive,” says Frankenthal in a murmur. “I won’t forgive the murderers of my son. If they’d bring my son back, I’d forgive them. Yet I’m ready to compromise, to reconcile, to open a new page.”

Pierre Klochendler is a contributor to Inter Press Service.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Update was slow, but still no lag in the editor window, and footnotes are intact.     This has been updated – Bernard Lewis, who passed away in May 2018, was a renowned British-American historian of Islam and the Middle East. A former British intelligence officer, Foreign Office staffer, and Princeton University professor, Lewis was…


Bernard Lewis was a renowned historian of Islam and the Middle East who stirred controversy with his often chauvinistic attitude towards the Muslim world and his associations with high-profile neoconservatives and foreign policy hawks.


John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, is President Trump’s National Security Adviser McMaster, reflecting a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.


Michael Joyce, who passed away in 2006, was once described by neoconservative guru Irving Kristol as the “godfather of modern philanthropy.”


Mike Pompeo, the Trump administration’s second secretary of state, is a long time foreign policy hawk and has led the public charge for an aggressive policy toward Iran.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Michael Flynn is a former Trump administration National Security Advisor who was forced to step down only weeks on the job because of his controversial contacts with Russian officials before Trump took office.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Trump is not the problem. Think of him instead as a summons to address the real problem, which in a nation ostensibly of, by, and for the people is the collective responsibility of the people themselves. For Americans to shirk that responsibility further will almost surely pave the way for more Trumps — or someone worse — to come.


The United Nations has once again turn into a battleground between the United States and Iran, which are experiencing one of the darkest moments in their bilateral relations.


In many ways, Donald Trump’s bellicosity, his militarism, his hectoring cant about American exceptionalism and national greatness, his bullying of allies—all of it makes him not an opponent of neoconservatism but its apotheosis. Trump is a logical culmination of the Bush era as consolidated by Obama.


For the past few decades the vast majority of private security companies like Blackwater and DynCorp operating internationally have come from a relatively small number of countries: the United States, Great Britain and other European countries, and Russia. But that seeming monopoly is opening up to new players, like DeWe Group, China Security and Protection Group, and Huaxin Zhongan Group. What they all have in common is that they are from China.


The Trump administration’s massive sales of tanks, helicopters, and fighter aircraft are indeed a grim wonder of the modern world and never receive the attention they truly deserve. However, a potentially deadlier aspect of the U.S. weapons trade receives even less attention than the sale of big-ticket items: the export of firearms, ammunition, and related equipment.


Soon after a Saudi-led coalition strike on a bus killed 40 children on August 9, a CENTCOM spokesperson stated to Vox, “We may never know if the munition [used] was one that the U.S. sold to them.”


The West has dominated the post-war narrative with its doctrine of liberal values, arguing that not only were they right in themselves but that economic success itself depended on their application. Two developments have challenged those claims. The first was the West’s own betrayal of its principles: on too many occasions the self interest of the powerful, and disdain for the victims of collateral damage, has showed through. The second dates from more recently: the growth of Chinese capitalism owes nothing to a democratic system of government, let alone liberal values.


RightWeb
share