Opportunity through crisis
If reports of indirect discussions between Israel and Hamas for a prisoner swap are correct and come to fruition, then the coronavirus can be thanked: a good example of finding an opportunity in crisis.
Six years after Hamas snatched the bodies of IDF soldiers Hadar Goldin and Oron Shaul, and kidnapped civilians Avera Mengistu and Hisham al-Sayed who crossed the border into Gaza, Israel and Hamas are reportedly making headway in indirect negotiations for some kind of swap.
It would be nothing, according to the reports, like the 2011 deal for Gilad Schalit, which saw Israel release some 1,027 Palestinians, hundreds of whom were serving life sentences for killing Israelis in terror attacks. That deal traumatized the country at the time, as well as afterward when many of the Hamas terrorists released were re-arrested again on terror charges.
The details of the present negotiations, as is always the case in such instances, is very sparing, with reports ranging from Israel releasing some elderly, sick, female and/or minors in its jails in return for the bodies of the IDF soldiers and the civilians, to Israel providing humanitarian aid to Gaza in exchange.
Which raises the question: If that’s the deal, why did it take so long to get there? Why wasn’t this type of arrangement brokered and implemented years ago?
Primarily, because Hamas was not ripe. After the success, from its perspective, of the Schalit exchange, it harbored hope it could get a better deal out of Israel if it just held out long enough, allowing public pressure in Israel to mount.
But that did not happen, and holding the captives and the bodies slowly became an albatross around the organization’s neck, keeping Israel from increasing humanitarian assistance. Anytime the issue of more aid came up to reconstruct Gaza, it was linked to the captives issue.
Why should Israel make humanitarian gestures to Gaza, went this argument – one which gained much traction in Israel – when Hamas was not even willing to make the smallest humanitarian gesture of returning dead bodies?
And then the coronavirus hit, and Hamas’s calculations changed. It realized that the pandemic could wreak havoc on the area under its control, and it would simply be unable to deal with the situation without assistance from Israel. It also realized that this assistance would be linked to the release of the Israelis being held.
Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, even before the coronavirus crisis, was signaling that he was interested in reaching some kind of long-term understanding with Israel so that he could focus on rebuilding Gaza. That understanding, however, would never be forthcoming without a deal for the captives.
The virus has provided Sinwar with a ladder from which to climb down from previous unrealistic demands for the return of the Israelis. As a result of the crisis and the possibility of a humanitarian catastrophe if corona spreads in Gaza, he can sell a more flexible position on the terms of the swap to his people. He can say that he is not giving up anything ideologically, but that trying times necessitate a willingness to do things that might not have been done before – all in order to fend off a catastrophe.
Israel, too, can use the crisis to say it is willing to make a deal now because it wants to get this issue off the table – not only because of a debt it owes the families, but also because of a self-interest in increasing cooperation with Gaza. If corona would spread in Gaza, many around the world would ultimately hold Israel responsible, even though the Strip is firmly in the hands of Hamas.
Likewise, Israel, regardless of the virus, has an interest in assisting infrastructure reconstruction in Gaza where possible, since problems there – such as sewage issues – spill over into Israel and cause problems here as well.
The virus has given both sides a reason and an excuse for showing more flexibility in their demands – which is why, while there have been many false starts on a deal over the last number of years, this time the negotiations may actually lead somewhere. And if they do, it could set in motion a positive dynamic that could lead to further understandings between Israel and Hamas.