The Gilad Shalit obsession

I wish Israel would announce one day a One-for-One policy when it comes to the exchange of prisoners, and explain it this way: We think it is insulting and dishonorable to the Arab and Muslim people to suggest that an Arab life is worth less than a Jewish one. That day will probably never happen. On this issue, Israel can't think straight, as this piece by Ari Shavit explains.

Bringing Gilad Shalit home is going to cost human lives. We do not know how many, we do not know their faces, we do not recognize their names. But we can assume that they walk among us. As a direct result of a Shalit deal they could lose their lives. When the Israeli government approves a deal at any price, this could be the price: dozens or perhaps hundreds of Israelis killed.
The victims of a Shalit deal might be killed in a number of ways: They might lose their lives in terror attacks. Others could die in a military operation that follows the attacks. There is a fear that some could be killed in missile attacks. Others might fall in the attempt to stop the missile attacks. If the deal erodes Israel's deterrence, it will weaken Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, flood the territories with skilled terrorists and lead to chaos. The chaos will cause violence, which means victims. Shalit will be redeemed at the cost of blood.
People will also be abducted, we may assume, because a Shalit deal will give future kidnappers an incentive. But future kidnappings will not necessarily take place on the Gaza border. They may take place in the West Bank, Galilee or Negev. Or in Turkey, Thailand or Nepal. The way Shalit is rescued from captivity could mean that in a year or two we will once again face heart-rending pictures of Israelis in captivity. But the next time it will not be one Israeli, but a number of them. We will not be able to save them because of the trauma of releasing hundreds of terrorists. We will not be able to pay the price to redeem them. Their fate is sealed. Does that mean that the deal should be rejected? Not necessarily. The deal will have serious repercussions on the relationship between Israel and its neighbors. It is likely that the deal has become unavoidable because of Israel's relationship with itself.
There is no doubt about it: When it comes to Gilad Shalit, Israel has lost its senses and good judgment. Every possible mistake has been made. Every emotional weakness has come to the fore. A failed government, a hasty media and a confused public has made the Shalit affair insufferable. Gilad has become an obsession, a focus for a national pathology. Perhaps to get well, we need to draw a line through what was and give up. To become itself again, Israel needs to get Gilad Shalit home to Mitzpeh Hila.
But there is one thing we must not do: whitewash things. The decision about Shalit is not tactical, but strategic. It might worsen the dynamics of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at a particularly sensitive moment. It could cause serious bloodshed. And so a government that approves the deal is like a government that decides to go to war.