[ad_1]
Reportedly, it would be nothing, like the 2011 deal for Gilad Shalit, which saw Israel free some 1,027 Palestinians, hundreds of whom were serving life terms for killing Israelis in terror attacks. That deal traumatized the country at the time, as well as later, when many of the released Hamas terrorists were again arrested on terrorism charges.
The details of the current negotiations, as is always the case in such cases, are very moderate, with reports ranging from Israel releasing some elderly, sick, women and / or minors in their jails in exchange for the bodies of the soldiers of the IDF and civilians, to Israel providing humanitarian aid to Gaza in return.
Which begs the question: If that’s the deal, why did it take so long to arrive? Why was this type of agreement not negotiated and implemented years ago?
Mainly, because Hamas was not mature. After the success, from his perspective, of the Shalit exchange, he harbored the hope that he could get a better deal from Israel if he just held on long enough, allowing public pressure in Israel to increase.
BUT THAT did not happen, and holding captives and bodies slowly became an albatross around the organization’s neck, preventing Israel from increasing humanitarian assistance. Every time the issue of more aid to rebuild Gaza came up, it was linked to the issue of captives.
Why should Israel make humanitarian gestures to Gaza, was this argument, one that gained a lot of strength in Israel, when Hamas was not even willing to make the smallest humanitarian gesture of returning corpses?
And then the coronavirus arrived, and Hamas’s calculations changed. He realized that the pandemic could wreak havoc in the area under his control, and he would simply be unable to deal with the situation without Israel’s help. He also realized that this assistance would be linked to the release of the detained Israelis.
Hamas leader Yihye Sinwar, even before the coronavirus crisis, was signaling that he was interested in reaching some kind of long-term understanding with Israel in order to focus on rebuilding Gaza. However, that understanding would never be achieved without an agreement for the captives.
The virus has provided Sinwar with a ladder from which to descend from previous unrealistic demands for the return of the Israelis. As a result of the crisis and the possibility of a humanitarian catastrophe if the crown is extended in Gaza, he can sell a more flexible position on the terms of the swap to his people. You can say that you are not giving up on anything ideologically, but that difficult times require a willingness to do things that have not been done before, all to avoid a catastrophe.
Israel can also use the crisis to say that it is ready to reach an agreement now because it wants to get this issue off the table, not only because of a debt it owes to families, but also out of self-interest in increasing cooperation with Gaza. If the crown were extended in Gaza, many around the world would eventually hold Israel accountable, despite the fact that the Strip is firmly in the hands of Hamas.
Similarly, Israel, regardless of the virus, has an interest in helping rebuild infrastructure in Gaza whenever possible, as problems there, such as sewer problems, extend to Israel and also cause problems here.
The virus has given both sides a reason and an excuse to show more flexibility in their demands, so while there have been many false starts in a deal in recent years, this time negotiations can lead somewhere. And if they do, it could set in motion a positive dynamic that could lead to greater understanding between Israel and Hamas.
[ad_2]
