Amit Segal on Israel’s 60-Year-Old Prisoner Dilemma

The Tikvah Podcast

Tikvah

Judaism, Politics, Religion & Spirituality, News

4.6 • 620 Ratings

🗓️ 31 January 2025

⏱️ 35 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

On January 15, Israel and Hamas agreed to a temporary cease-fire. About 30 Israeli hostages would be released, each one in exchange for some 30 to 50 convicted terrorists in Israeli prisons. Of course, this is a controversial arrangement that sets a terrible precedent to incentivize future hostage-taking.

At the same time, imagine if your mother or father or daughter or friend were among the hostages. Then you wouldn’t really care about that future risk when confronted with the chance to return your own loved one to safety. As many have said, it is a very bad deal, and it is easy to understand why Israelis would support it, even in full knowledge of the risk.

There have by now been many discussions and analyses of this deal and what it means. I recently hosted one of those discussions with the former U.S. ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and the former American special representative for Iran, Elliott Abrams. Today’s conversation is meant to be a little different. It takes a broader, more capacious historical view of how Israel has dealt with this tragic dilemma over the last five decades.

Israel for many years has insisted that it would not negotiate with terrorists. It said that when planes full of Israeli hostages were taken in the late 1960s and it has developed a reputation for this tough-minded, hard-headed position. At the same time, it has always negotiated with terrorists, starting with the planes full of hostages taken in the late 1960s. In this its rhetorical position and its actions have always been at odds and remain so today. That’s the messiness of practical, prudential judgment in a democracy when the lives of citizens are at stake. To understand this history, and unpack the dilemma at its heart, Mosaic’s editor Jonathan Silver is joined by the Israeli journalist Amit Segal, who can be seen on Israel’s Channel 12 and whose work can be read in the pages of Yedioth Ahronoth.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	On January 15th, Israel and Hamas agreed to a temporary ceasefire.
0:12.3	About 30 Israeli hostages would be released, each one in exchange for some 30 to 50 convicted terrorists in Israeli prisons.
0:20.4	This is a controversial arrangement that sets an absolutely terrible precedent to incentivize
0:26.0	future hostage-taking.
0:27.8	And at the same time, imagine if one of the hostages were your mother, your father, your
0:32.7	daughter, your friend.
0:34.5	Then you wouldn't really care about that future risk, when confronted with the
0:38.4	chance to return your own loved one to safety. As many have said, it is a very bad deal,
0:45.3	and it is easy to understand why Israelis would support it, even in full knowledge of the risk.
0:51.6	There have been by now many conversations and analyses of this deal and what it means.
0:56.0	I recently hosted one of those conversations with the former U.S. Ambassador to Israel,
1:00.2	David Friedman, and the former American Special Representative for Iran, Elliot Abrams.
1:05.1	You can see that conversation on YouTube. But today's conversation in this podcast is meant to be
1:10.4	a little bit different. We'll
1:12.1	aim to take a broader, more capacious historical view of how Israel has dealt with this tragic
1:17.6	dilemma over the last five decades. Welcome to the Tikva podcast. I'm your host, Jonathan Silver.
1:24.9	My guest this week is Amit Segal, the Israeli journalist and television
1:28.3	reporter. Amit can be seen on Channel 12 in Israel and in the pages of Yadiot Ahlonot. In our conversation,
1:34.8	we try to unpack a dilemma. Israel has always said that it will not negotiate with terrorists.
1:40.6	It said that when planes full of Israeli hostages were taken in the late 1960s, and it has developed a reputation for this tough-minded, hard-headed position. And at the same time, Israel has always negotiated with terrorists, starting with planes full of hostages taken in the late 1960s. In this, its rhetorical position and its practical judgment
2:03.6	have always been and are now today at odds. That is the messiness of a practical, prudential
2:09.6	judgment in a democracy when one's own civilians are at stake. If you enjoy this conversation,
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Tikvah, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Tikvah and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.