The Legacy of Entebbe Lives On

Forty years have passed since the rescue of Jewish hostages was carried out by IDF soldiers at Uganda's Entebbe airport.  A number of events were held recently to mark the occasion, and to remember all that happened in the hijacking of the Air France plane, the separation of the Jewish hostages from the others and the ultimate rescue of the hostages in an astonishing operation by IDF troops.  With a heavy heart, the victims of this hijacking and rescue operation were also remembered and commemorated.  In total, 4 of the hostages were killed as well as the IDF commander of the operation, Lt. Col. Yonni Netanyahu.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu chose this opportunity to visit Entebbe for the first time, to personally witness the place where his older brother was killed.

Operation Thunderbolt  was renamed Operation Yonatan to commemorate its fallen commander.  With the luxury of hindsight to look back on this operation, the legacy that Operation Yonatan has left for Israel and its security establishment can be assessed.  This rescue mission was undoubtedly one of the most daring and audacious missions of its type during its day, and even since then.  It has been the subject of numerous books, movies and military case studies, such has been the level of interest into the operation.  Besides the audacity and sheer chutzpa involved in pulling off this operation, the tiny details that were taken into consideration and the very short period of time within which all the preparations were made, have served to elevate the mission to legendary status.

The ramifications of this operation in Israel, and in the Jewish world in general, have been profound.  The operation has elevated Israel's secret service, the Mossad, to be afforded greater respect and recognition by lay people and peers in a way that other secret service organisations do not enjoy.  Because much of the work undertaken by secret service organisations, particularly the Mossad, is secret by its nature and is seldom made public, it is difficult to measure the effectiveness and the successes of the organisation.  Operation Yonatan was a visible sign of success, not only for the IDF, but indeed for the Israeli secret service.  It was, after all, the Mossad who were responsible for much of the intelligence-gathering, and who were integrally involved in every step of the operation.  It was one of the few visible successes that the Mossad would be happy to be publicly associated with, and which served to demonstrate its amazing capabilities.  This operation (along with a few others), has given the Mossad the status of a legend in the secret service world.  Israel's enemies know that they should be on their guard to expect the unexpected.  They have learned from this that very little is beyond the Mossad's capabilities.  Not only does the Mossad have the ability to carry out these types of operations, it also has the audacity and fearlessness to do so.  That legend continues to the current day.  Frequently, when crazy and improbable "accidents" occur that impair the work being done by Israel's enemies, the Mossad is the first organisation suspected of involvement.  Despite the automatic suspicion of the Mossad and the close monitoring of its operations, it is extremely seldom that hard evidence can be brought to confirm involvement of Mossad agents in an operation.  Rather than causing the Mossad to operate with impunity or carelessness, it gives the Mossad the impetus to carry out more and greater operations in the protection of the State of Israel and Jews around the world.

The fact that Operation Yonatan rescued both Israeli and non-Israeli Jews has also left its mark.  There is no other country around the world, whose secret service operates to protect the citizens of countries that are not its own.  And yet, this is the hallmark of the Mossad, as borne out by Operation Yonatan, when it comes to the protection of Jews who are not citizens of Israel.  The reason that the hostages were separated in Entebbe as they were, had nothing to do with them being citizens of Israel.  Instead, they were separated on the basis of whether they were Jewish or not.  Exactly as was the case during the Shoah.  Clearly, the Israelis were automatically included in the group of Jews, but they were not alone.  When Operation Yonatan was carried out, it was carried out in the name of all the Jews in the group, whether they were Israeli or not.  This was further evidence from the government of Israel, and from the instruments of the government, that the country stands ready to help Jews from all corners of the earth.  This was cemented into law when the Law of Return was enacted to allow Jews to claim immediate citizenship of the State of Israel, and has been demonstrated in numerous rescue missions of Jews when they were considered to be in danger.  Operation Yonatan was another significant sign of this commitment.

Little has changed over the past 40 years in terms of the threat that confronts Jews, no matter where they happen to be in the world.  We have seen Jews establish a level of comfort in their host countries, only to come under threat again.  The latest wave of violence in Europe, and in France in particular, has certainly been directed against Jews.  It is with pride and confidence that the State of Israel reaches out to these Jews to offer them protection in their homes, but also to offer them a home with greater protection.  And we have seen these Jews take up on this in their droves.  This is, amongst other things, the legend of Operation Yonatan.  Wherever Jews are in the world, the Jewish state will protect them.

Perhaps the greatest legacy left by Operation Yonatan comes in a much more personal form.  The death of Yonni Netanyahu left a scar on his family, and left a profound mark on a 27 year-old MIT student.  This student was Benjamin Netanyahu, younger brother of Yonni.  In his own words, the death of his older brother, "changed my life and steered it to its current course".  It is tough to judge to what extent the death of Yonni really spurred Benjamin to achieve what he has achieved over the years.  It is possible that he would have risen to be prime minister of Israel and one of the most influential leaders on earth, even without the push that he received from Yonni's death.  But we know about what he has managed to do in rising to be one of the best known and most influential people, and the influence that he has exerted over the years.  And we know that much of this has been with Yonni in mind.  The visit to Entebbe by the prime minister was not only in his capacity as prime minister, but was intensely personal as he mourned at the location where  his older brother and hero met his death.  One could not help wondering what Yonni would be thinking as he looked down on the scene from his seat in heaven.

As we look at the events at Entebbe with the benefit of 40 years of hindsight, the legacy is probably stronger now than it was in the euphoric days that followed the operation.  The strong message sent out by the Israeli government regarding its commitment to protect Jews around the world, and the message sent out by the IDF and the Mossad regarding their ability to do so, are louder and clearer than before.  And the personal impact left on one young student who went on to be one of the world's most recognisable personalities is unquestionable.  If the same set of circumstances presented themselves again, I have no doubt that the response would be no different.  This ultimately proves the greatness of the operation.

Gilad To Be Released - The Agony With The Ecstasy

The mood across Israel was changed in a dramatic fashion on Tuesday last week when the news was made public during the early evening that an agreement had been reached with Hamas for the return of the kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.  After 5 long years during which Hamas had allowed no access to him at all, not even by human rights organisations like the International Committee of the Red Cross, it seems as though Gilad Shalit will finally be on his way home.

Of course, the agreement that was finally struck by David Meidan and the Israeli negotiating team comes at a high cost to Israel.  The objective behind the kidnapping in the first instance, was to extract a high price from Israel by insisting that prisoners in Israeli jails be released in exchange for any agreement to release Shalit.  This is exactly what they have achieved, even though it has taken more than 5 long years to finally reach the agreement.  Israel will release 1,027 Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails in order to secure the freedom of one IDF soldier.  Many of these prisoners are serving life sentences, and have "blood on their hands" for murdering innocent Israeli civilians.  Among those due for release are those who planned the Sbarro and Moment restaurant bombings in Jerusalem, those who planned the Seder night bombing at the Park Hotel in Netanya and those who planned the kidnap of Gilad Shalit.  There are also many others who were involved in numerous bus bombings, and others who have committed similar heinous crimes.  Along with the euphoria of knowing that Gilad will finally be returned to his parents and to the people of Israel, have come searching questions about the terms of his release.

As we sat in our Sukkah on Wednesday evening celebrating the festival of Sukkot (Tabernacles), the conversation inevitably turned to the deal that was struck for Gilad's release.  There were some sitting around the table who felt that the price was too high, and that the deal should never have been done on these terms.  All the old concerns and issues were raised to justify why this deal endangers Israel's security going forward.  One friend said that he thought that the prisoner exchange shows a weakness in Israeli society that we are prepared to contemplate a deal that will return only one of our soldiers for more than a thousand of theirs.  It is his view that our one soldier should effectively be sacrificed in order to protect the security of Israel going forward.  The welfare of one soldier should not be allowed to destabilise the security of the entire State of Israel by placing convicted murderers and terrorists back on the streets.  This friend has a daughter currently serving her two years in the IDF.  When I asked how he would respond if the soldier in question was Heaven forbid his own daughter, he brought me the story of Joseph Stalin who refused to accept a deal with the Germans for a prisoner exchange to return his own son, Yacov, from captivity whilst a soldier in the Red army.  Yacov ultimately died while being held by the Germans.  My friend's point is that the state is larger than any of its individuals, and that the government should behave accordingly.

As expected, the prisoner exchange has come under a great deal of resistance from the families of the victims who were maimed and murdered at the hands of the prisoners due for release.  Many have already made it clear how insulted they feel by the release of the murderers of their loved ones.  We can all understand their pain, and the fact that they feel that this insults the memories of their dearly departed.  The government went out of its way to arrest and imprison the perpetrators of these horrible attacks.  Now, it seems that all is being thrown away by the prisoner exchange deal.  This view would be entirely valid if our circumstances were normal.  Unfortunately, like so many other things in Israel and the Middle East, things are never straightforward.

My view is that we should do all that we can to respect the memories of those who have fallen in the line of duty protecting their homeland, and those whose lives have been taken by those seeking to destroy our country and our people.  While doing so, however, we are also forced to confront the new realities and circumstances that arise each day.  I think that the strength of our society lies in the fact that we do value each individual as if he is the only one.  While I agree that the price seems unbalanced when we exchange 1 for more than 1,000, the message that it sends to our serving soldiers and their families can only help to strengthen the resolve and the strength of our military, and of our society as a whole.  Our security forces can operate in the knowledge that they are more than simply a number, and that the government will do all that is required to protect them, even under the most extreme situation.  The argument that, through this prisoner exchange, the government is releasing murderers and terrorists to kill and maim again is valid.  The security services have said that they can take care of this situation, and I believe that there are so many potential terrorists and murderers in the West Bank and Gaza, that the release of this motley crew does not significantly increase the risk.  And while the exchange deal does reinforce what the terrorists already knew when they kidnapped Gilad, which is that Israel values each of its individual soldiers and will be prepared to strike an unbalanced prisoner exchange deal to release him, I don't believe that this dramatically increases the risk of other soldiers being kidnapped in the future.  This is because the risk has been at the highest level for many years, and the fact that 5 years have passed without another soldier being kidnapped is not because they have not tried.  Regular attempts have been made to kidnap soldiers, and we should expect that such attempts will continue.

Israel is forced to exist under extreme and severe circumstances.  The risk of a terror or missile attack against her civilians is ever-present.  The act of rounding up those who have brought death and destruction on Israelis in the past is more about justice than it is about reducing the risk levels.  It is clear that removing such individuals from a situation where they can repeat their crimes does give some increased level of security.  I am not convinced, however, that arresting these individuals, even when related to 1,000 people, serves to dramatically improve Israel's security.  Apparently the Shin Bet security agency agrees with this assessment, and has given its approval to the prisoner exchange.  The Shin Bet chief Yoram Cohen described the prisoner exchange deal as "a bad deal, but the only one available to us".  This sums it up for many in Israel.  We would prefer not to have to release criminals back onto the street, but the alternative of not doing so is worse.

The Israeli government last night released the names of the first group of prisoners set for release.  This is to allow the 48 hour period that the law requires for any legal challenges to the prisoner exchange before it goes ahead.  Objections to the exchange have already been filed with the High Court of Justice, and the court will hear these petitions during the course of today.  Assuming that the court gives its approval to the exchange, it is expected that Gilad Shalit will return to Israel during the course of Tuesday.  For one family and for many Israelis, this will be a moment of great joy and the ultimate fulfilment of the government's responsibility to each of its citizens.  For many families, it will reopen painful wounds and memories.  Our joy is tempered by their pain, and the sacrifice that these fmailies have made will never be ignored or forgotten. Unfortunately, nothing can return their loved ones, and it is my hope that they will find a way to feel the joy of the Shalit family and other Israelis.  We wait expectantly for the moment when Gilad will emerge, alive and well, into the arms of his family and the Israeli nation.

The Long Waite

I recently completed reading the autobiography of Beirut hostage Terry Waite. His book entitled "Taken on Trust" is excellently written and a worthwhile read. It has, however, left me feeling bewildered.

Terry Waite was the Archbishop of Canterbury's special envoy dealing with Middle East hostages. He worked tirelessly to negotiate the release of hostages held by various extremist groups around the Middle East, including those who were connected to the church as well as those who were not. He enjoyed some success in securing the release of a number of captives before he himself was captured in Beirut in January 1987. He was held for a total of 1,763 days, of which nearly 4 years was in solitary confinement. Waite's story is one of mental strength and survival. But, more than anything, his story is one of humility and modesty. Beyond describing facts regarding his treatment in captivity and some of his thoughts and frustrations during this time, Waite astonishingly has no bad word for his captors nor Hezbollah, the organisation which they represented.

I could not read one page of this book without thinking about Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier held in captivity by Hamas for the past two and a half years. I could not help wondering whether he is being held in similar conditions to those described by Waite, whether he is being treated in the same inhumane way as Waite, whether he is also being chained to his cell and denied exercise and sunlight like Waite, whether he is also being allowed only one toilet visit each day and whether he has the mental strength to get through his ordeal. Terry Waite is undoubtedly a man of incredible mental fortitude, and yet the scars left on him by his ordeal will haunt him for the rest of his days. So how can we expect Gilad, who recently celebrated his 22nd birthday in captivity, to be holding up? The thought is a troubling one.

Unlike Waite, I have no qualms about wearing my heart on my sleeve. I try to think about what type of people would subject innocent human beings to this sort of treatment. If it was an isolated incident, it could be justified as an uncoordinated action by a renegade group of extremists. Unfortunately, this is not isolated and the group is not renegade. This is a policy adopted and condoned by many different groups around the Middle East. There is one thing that these groups have in common - they are all Muslim extremists. Do we, therefore, conclude that this is an action adopted to advance the Muslim cause? It is difficult not to. How can we justify having anything to do with such people? These are the people that Israel is being pressurised to sign a peace agreement with, in accordance with which a state bordering Israel will be created. Are these the neighbours that we would choose to live with? It is true to say that I am creating a generalisation about Muslims on the basis of actions of some of them. My problem is that I do not hear or see the so-called moderate Muslims standing up and opposing the horrifying policy of hostage-taking. Either they are quiet, or they are in quiet agreement. My interpretation is the latter.

There has been much criticism of the handling of the Gilad Shalit case by the Israeli government. I have to admit being part of this chorus in chiding the government for not doing more to get Shalit released before today. Having read Waite's book and taken further note of some of the recent press reports on this saga, I acknowledge that the criticism may not be entirely justified. It seems as though the requirements set by Hamas for his release are being continuously moved and revised. Each time the Israeli government begins to consider a proposal and to find logical ways to accommodate it or find a reasonable compromise, Hamas withdraws the offer. Even the Egyptians, who have been acting as facilitators in the exchange negotiations, have expressed their frustrations at Hamas. A cynic may conclude that they are more interested in playing mind games than achieving anything in a prisoner swap.

It is inevitable that people may bring the US prison in Guantanamo Bay as an example of how non-Muslims perpetrate similar criminal behaviour. Whilst not trying to condone the manner in which the Americans have handled Guantanamo Bay, and particularly the length of time taken to process the prisoners there, I find it very easy to distinguish between this and hostage-taking. If Gilad Shalit had received the most basic access to the International Committee of the Red Cross, and if his captors had provided his family with some information about his well-being, there may have been room for a discussion. But, by denying him even these most basic rights set out in the Geneva Convention, the hostage-takers set themselves apart as the most inhumane of people.

In his postscript, Terry Waite relates that he heard, subsequent to his release, that some of those who were responsible for guarding him were later shot due to the fact that "they knew too much". How can we possibly expect to hold a sensible negotiation with people like this? And yet, for Gilad's sake, we have no choice.