Friday, October 21, 2011

The Shalit deal and Islamic tradition


The Palestinian street tried to say: "We won" but Hamas also knows: An agreement in which 1,000 Palestinians are released in exchange for one soldier is a blow to Palestinian honor. There are now those among them who are jealous of the Israeli readiness to endanger the lives of many to free one soldier. Hamas' victory is clear to everyone -- not over Israel, but rather the Palestinian Authority.

Dr. Reuven Berko Today's spiritual leaders and Hamas operatives - radical Islamic religious leaders - are acting according to lessons and interpretations taken from the Messenger Muhammad's actions at the time Islam was being formed.

Besides the well-learned violent tradition picked up by the Hamas elders in Gaza, they use two main lessons garnered from the failed siege that Muhammad laid in the seventh century against the fortified city of "infidels "Taif. The rebellious city would not give up, despite the volleys of huge rocks Mohammed and his allies launched from catapults that fired at the city's population, not worrying about hitting women and children indiscriminately.

This battle gave birth to traditions and religious edicts which permitted the overlooking of the theoretical Muslim prohibition which allowed for the killing of the enemy's civilians at a time of war, because they were already involved in the war and no differentiation could be made between them.

Beginning with this, the interpretation of the Islamic Palestinian understanding of war widened to include the direct killing of Israelis, "because every baby will one day be a soldier," their leaders said. The second interpretation gleaned from this incident permitted the shooting at enemy territory and killing of its civilians, even if the attack also killed Islamic prisoners held by the enemy. This was decided because under such circumstances refraining from doing so hurt Muslim interests and the realization of their goals. Around the same time Islamic "operational suicide" was approved if it was intentionally aimed at glorifying the name of Allah and Islam.

In light of this attitude, what can be expected from such an organization when it comes to an enemy captive? How do its people interpret Israel's agreement to trade one soldier for about 1,000 Palestinian murderers?

Many Israeli citizens believe that the government's decision to release the terrorists in exchange for Gilad Shalit derived from Israel's strength. This perception is based on the realization that only a strong and solid society, which feels a mutual responsibility for its soldiers and citizens and a nationalist-family approach to its children sent on a mission would endanger itself so clearly and so severely for one soldier.

The Palestinians, whose prisoners have spent dozens of years in Israeli jails, believe the prisoner exchange deal stems from social weakness which in turn reflects the collective's inability to stand up to the pressures involved and act with the necessary patience. From the Palestinians' viewpoint, Israel's self-image as a country with strong ethical beliefs is not important at all.

As for Hamas, this perceived weakness will clearly lead to similar kidnappings in the future to release prisoners still in Israeli jails and an attempt to obtain additional achievements in a similar fashion. Murderers' fear of life imprisonment has disappeared along with the deterrence this offered Israel. Hamas continues to believe that wiping out Israel is something that the organization knows ahead of time will happen, similar to Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah's statement that Israel is a "paper tiger."

The best proof of this was presented by Hamas's Ghazi Hamad, known as the "architect of the agreement" who recently pledged to continue his organization's actions against Israel "with all its tools." On the eve of Shalit's release, Hamad spoke proudly of the Islamic ethics which dictated the treatment of the prisoner Gilad Shalit, whom he had hidden in his basements. Hamad's statements raise the question of what exactly the Islamic attitude is towards the enemy's prisoners?

A look at the Koran shows that the commandment regarding prisoners is: "Kill the enemy wherever you find them, lie in wait for them and capture them everyplace you can." It also says: "When you encounter infidels, strike them with your sword and after you do what you will for them, put them in chains and now the choice will be in your hands to let them go or demand ransom money until the war ends."

The fate of hundreds of prisoners from the Jewish tribe of Bnei Karira, who surrendered to Muhammad's fighters and were chained and left under the Saudi sun one hot afternoon with no shade indicates how they really felt about the prisoners. Muhammad may have ordered to give them rest and water to cool them down, but immediately afterwards he ordered them slaughtered and buried in a mass grave. Deals were also struck in this founding incident. The wives and daughters of those slain were sold as slaves for weapons and goods.

Within this Islamic "ethical" heritage, Gilad Shalit survived, alone in his captivity, part of a "business deal" exploited by all those demanding human rights which was in doubt, and constant death threats in a place where a person's value – even a Muslim's – is worth almost nothing. The "business deal" that Israel jumped on saved his life.

Damage inspection

"The 'deal' for the release of terrorists in exchange for soldier Gilad Shalit is an undeniable strategic achievement for Hamas. The organization is at a dead end and experiencing growing distress in Gaza. There has been a lot of complaining recently, with no real achievement. The prisoners' release is a painful blow to Israel whose citizens will doubtless be exposed to attacks by these released terrorists who have murdered hundreds of Jews and ultimately were tried for nothing. Now they are planning future attacks while giving Israel the finger, exploiting a winning formula that obtained their release.

This is a huge achievement for Hamas which managed to hide Shalit from the probing eyes of the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) and also managed to get agreement for the deal from the prisoners' leaders in Israeli jails. This real achievement was also expressed to the Palestinian population and to Israeli Arabs as Hamas was able to score where Arab states and the Palestinian Authority have failed to progress in peace talks with Israel.

This is a well-timed blow to the Palestinian Authority which tried, so far unsuccessfully – to their chagrin – to gain the status of a state via U.N. agencies, and was unable to show any serious achievement similar to that of the Palestinians in the West Bank, Gaza and the Palestinian diaspora. The Hamas deal's success in the field intensified as Palestinian Authority failure grew in the diplomatic arena.

The timing of the deal, for Hamas, also came from the fact that its headquarters in Syria and its ties with Iran and Hezbollah are in doubt, and depend on the fate of President Basher Assad, who is fighting for control of Syria.

Now Hamas is looking for a temporary resting place, at least during this uncertain period. Because having better relations with the Egyptian government now seems like a good investment. That is why from the organization's standpoint, the fact that they attributed the achievement in the exchange to Egypt's leaders and figures - who are fighting for their own status - was a wise move. For Egypt, it was a chance to regain its regional place as "The Mother of The Arab Countries" and display positive achievements like the quality and usefulness of their ties with Israel both now and in the future, as well as improvements in Egypt's relations with the West, the Americans and Hamas.

It was also a positive development for Egypt in the bubbling internal and Islamic situation at home. Israel cooperated in this effort and apologized to the Egyptians for killing Egyptian soldiers in August and thanked the head of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces Mohammed Tantawi for his successful efforts in completing the Shalit deal; a boost for Tantawi.

As for Israel, it certainly was ready for any time that Hamas showed it was ready for an exchange. The troubled, tragic image of navigator Ron Arad still racks the conscience of the Israeli government, and with it public pressure regarding Arad that provided the tail wind for an exchange.

The gathering clouds over the "Arab Spring" indicates increasing uncertainty regarding regional geo-political stability. These question marks intensify for anything related to the escalating Iranian situation and the question of the operative policy that it will take against Hamas in the Gaza Strip in the foreseeable future. All this led to the Israeli decision that it would be better that Gilad come home as quickly as possible and that Hamas' demands be met with a flexible approach. Israel relied on Egyptian mediation and rejected Turkish efforts to get involved again.

Daydreamers should remove their doubts. No opening for direct talks between us and Hamas has been created here. As far as anything regarding Israel is concerned, Hamas will continue to work hard on its plans to destroy Israel and to take over the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. The organization does not plan on changing its stripes and we must prepare for its attempts to continue to develop its plans to destroy Israel. We can estimate that it will try to accomplish something using Oriental bazaar tactics and manipulations to extract some additional achievements even before the deal is completed.

The Palestinian Authority, which was recently weakened due to the failure of its diplomatic efforts against Israel, was hit hard again by Hamas' success which only worsened the blow. The Palestinian Authority is not ignoring Hamas' great achievement and is aware that it came at its account. Palestinian Authority leaders sourly look at the gatherings, parades and Hamas flags flying off the mosques and town squares.

Palestinian Authority speakers in the media are at work trying to trivialize the deal. They emphasize its partiality and say bias led to a large number of terrorist leaders left behind in jail, with Hamas doing nothing to free them. A fair amount of the criticism is directed towards the Israeli "plot," to which they say Hamas is a part. Palestinian prisoners are being expelled outside "Palestine." In any event a bad, bitter taste remains from the deal concerning the claim that achievements can only be gotten out of Israel with power.

Self-criticism

The public's mood in Israel reflects pluralism and an open, tough self-criticism. The public debate notes two main conflicting stands, both coming from moral considerations and the awareness of a common society and fate. Free the prisoners or not? In these discussions principles touch on the ties between the citizens' duties and security and the soldiers' mission and security from the mutual guarantee of the safety of the baby-faced soldier Gilad, to his family's situation, to the future message this sent to the soldiers on identification and suffering. In all these discussions the formula has not yet been found to halt the terror expected to come from the mass release of terrorists – the next kidnapping and extortion and the resulting unpreventable deterioration of the security situation.

As things have turned out, it seems that Israel should rethink the question of carrying out the death sentence for terrorists as well as the operative thinking of the defense forces in preparing for contact, including armed clashes with terrorists and murderers. We do not need the "Neighborhood Watch Procedure" or negotiations to surrender, and we should try to fully conclude the events in the field.

The illusion that a terrorist will certainly fight to the end and endanger soldiers is nonsense. For this very reason soldiers and not civilians are found at points of conflict. Under these circumstances, it is worth giving up even on the potential intelligence we could get from contact with murderers and terrorists. That will definitely lower the motivation for terror, kidnappings and blackmail from which Israeli citizens suffer.

The Defense Ministry's stand regarding the deal reflects an approach according to which adding another 1,000 terrorists to those already in the territories does not dramatically change the situation. This approach represents the difference between a person who does not know how to swim and will drown in the shallow side of the water to the outstanding swimmer who will make it no matter how deep.

From a legal standpoint we can assume that the legal limitations which allow for trading an Israeli prisoner for a terrorist in a "one for one" deal will not succeed. The idea is that these conditions will tie the hands of the Israeli government and will strengthen its stand probably at the Gaza border with the next kidnapping. Hamas will not care about the legal points in negotiations for the next kidnap victim, the law will not prevent a protest tent from being set up by parents nor will it block the public storm, with the same emotional appeal, as we witnessed in the Shalit affair.

Arab honor

In exchange for the pictures of 1,000 bearded men set to burst out of the hotel rooms and institutions of higher learning called an Israell jail in Gaza, a thin, pale soldier, eyes blinded by the sun is about to leave his cell deep underground ground and see daylight for the first time in a while. This is the "big fish" that Hamas kidnapped who symbolizes its main achievement since it took over control of Gaza.

This show presents a grotesque picture from the Palestinian public's view stemming from the formal and numerical comparisons between a pale, thin soldier and 1,000 prisoners going free. In social gatherings in the mourning tents for the dead, in the corners of mosques and in closed circles in which honest conversations take place about the Shalit deal, a thin crack of Palestinian self-criticism and a feeling of degradation is heard expressed by a few of those present while a small minority of these attitudes and feelings are expressed in the open media.

The criticism makes Israel seem stronger and points bitterly at the difference between the honest, no-limits approach of the Israelis to their people compared to the Palestinians' cynicism towards their prisoners and their friends.

A reasonable number of Palestinians note that while the Islamists are willing to kill their people and prisoners in the enemy's hands as part of a religious, instrumental approach, the Jews are willing to sacrifice their civilian's security for the life of a single Israeli captive. A brave speaker publicly claimed on TV that the deal is a disgrace to the Arabs and that if Hamas had the same number of Jewish prisoners – it would refuse to exchange them for one Palestinian prisoner. The same speaker, in this context, expressed an open appreciation for Israel and its treatment of its soldiers and citizens.

The mythological Islamic heroism narrative dealing with the victory of a small group of Muslims in the Islamic battles against the huge forces of the enemy, with the aid of Allah's angels, almost becomes trivial, almost a joke when compared to a convoy of buses filled with 1,000 terrorists flashing the "V for victory" sign passing that same shy, introverted Israeli soldier. Hamas' controversial achievement also pales against footage of women released, like Amna Mouna whom every Egyptian household knows is tied one way or another to condoms and underwear bombs, from the seduction of an Israeli boy to suspicious meetings with men or some other dubious sexual affair.

This equation -- the release of masses of Palestinian prisoners for one Israeli prisoner -- strengthens the sad feeling that the Hamas people, the descendants of Hagar, really feel a lack of value in their lives, which has been inculcated as compared to the ethical and national superiority of the Jews and Israel. It seems to me that this equation, which lays deep in their consciousness, is what stirs anger and grumbling about the Jews, and has from the beginning of time.

Imprisoned by the satire

What do the Palestinians really think about the release of 1,000 terrorists for one Jew? Within the vocal wave of satisfaction that generally comes over the Palestinians in situations like the murder of a young Jewish boy by a woman terrorist, or the release of Hamas prisoners at this time, you occasionally also hear those who have a sense of self-criticism, a feeling of humiliation from being exposed as something cheap. There are not many brave ones in this society, whose members generally think and act in ways that reflect characteristics of herd-like repression and hide their real opinions, in which the individual in most cases plays a small, instrumental and voiceless part in the collective riding along, mainly raising dust.

Critics who dare to criticize or say unpopular things out loud take a chance and are liable to pay a very high price. And indeed, a critical minority in this society believes that the Palestinians even have difficulty analyzing situations to the core and to have an honest and truthful discussion with themselves about achievements and failures. This failure leads them to "decorate" today's reality and sometimes bring it to the level of absurd lies about themselves and leads to incredible conflict.

It is interesting to note that the Palestinians can sometimes be in a situation saturated with conscious and religious satire which do not seem to go together and even violate the myth of Arab pride that they hang on to so dearly.

This ability allows, for example, for a dynamic in which on the one side Hamas' Islamists can kill Israeli citizens and on the other hand, when they take a beating in revenge, they see it as unfair. That is when they ask for the help of the Christian West, the "infidel," which they are prepared by declaration to wipe out at the next stage, according to the ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood which these Egyptians believe. Take for example the fact that they take pride in their desire to die as "shahidim" [martyrs] as much as we value life. But every time the Israelis send an Islamic terrorist straight to the virgins of the Garden of Eden, they get very angry and call for revenge.

It is hard for the Hamas heroes to deal with the religious conflict created when Palestinian children are taught from infancy, based on inciting Islamist heritage, that the Jewish people are cowardly and always fight from behind fortifications or shields. That conflict is expressed every time they themselves shoot intentionally at Israeli civilians from inside a civilian neighborhood of their own and then flee like mice to their holes. It is even more difficult for them to explain, mainly to themselves, how they are hunted down later by thin Israelis who courageously invade the terror nests in the midst of their outposts.

These bearded men live in an even bigger conflict by purposely ignoring certain verses in the Koran which describe the fight Muhammad himself staged from the "Al-Suha." These are passages which describe the Jews as the chosen people and the inheritors of Jerusalem and the blessed Land of Israel and fortifications and note that the Children of Israel are commanded to return to it as its owners on God's orders. They live amazingly conflicted lives as they are prepared to deny these verses and make them irrelevant and lacking of any prophetic standing, to trade them in for wild explanations in claiming that the Palestinians have the right to this land as well even though they were never a people and are not even hinted at in the Koran.

The prisoners strike now taking place at the Israeli prisons is an up-to-date example of a warped sense of self-justice and the saturation with conflicts of the heroes of Palestinian Islam. On the one hand they prevented Gilad Shalit from getting his minimal rights as a man and prisoner according to international law, but on the other they are hunger-striking and demanding with inconceivable chutzpah the best of what Israeli prisons have to offer, including education, food, relatives' visits, communication devices and more.

This is another guarantee that somewhere in the back of the Palestinian brain there is an assumption which recognizes the moral superiority of the Jews and even builds its operative Palestinian work considerations on that.

At the basis of this assumption lies the following sentence which is said by the leaders over and over: "You cannot do to us what we do to you." They are right. There is a real difference between the operating code of Jews and that of Islamic Palestinians. We are not just talking about the science achievement and Nobel Prizes the Jewish people have to show for themselves. We are mainly talking about the Jewish way of life compared to the world's Industry of Death that the radical Islamists are creating as a counterbalance. Unfortunately there is no "deal" that can remove Hamas itself from the prison of lies and conflicts to which they are chained.

No comments: