(Government Press Office)
Two newspapers discuss speculation regarding the release of abducted IDF soldier Gilad Shalit:
Yediot Aharonot discusses the latest reports regarding captive IDF soldier Gilad Shalit. The paper asserts that "This is not a deal for the release of prisoners with blood on their hands in exchange for the release of Gilad Shalit from captivity," and adds that "This is the release of prisoners in blood up to their ears." The author believes that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his government are facing a dilemma: "Is the State of Israel prepared to release murderers, some of whom are military leaders who constitute nationalist symbols and models for imitation among the most extremist Palestinian factions; people whose release will give hope to every potential murderer and send a clear message: It is possible to murder Jews because in the end, somebody will release you." The author warns that the deal in which Gilad Shalit is released will be the model for any future similar negotiations, the guidelines of this or that Defense Ministry committee notwithstanding. The paper also cautions that the putative deal "is a death sentence for the Abu Mazen government, which will – in the worst case – lead to anarchy in the territories and – in the best case – to the flourishing of extremist factions within Fatah."
The Jerusalem Post debates the wisdom of setting free some of the most dangerous terrorists Israel has ever encountered in return for the release of Gilad Shalit, and stresses that "As much as we Israelis ache to see Gilad Schalit home with his family, the emotional blackmail of campaigners who say the country should do 'anything' to achieve his release could unleash on our home front the very same sociopathic killers Israel's security forces worked so hard to capture in the first place."
---------------------------------
Ma'ariv accuses the Palestinian Authority of waging "diplomatic, judicial and psychological war" against Israel. In this context, the author cites, inter alia, "The obduracy on the issue of settlements, the global campaign to boycott Israeli goods, [and] the effort to turn the issue of Palestinian prisoners into a global issue." The paper believes that the Palestinians have been emboldened to take such a line due both to the Netanyahu Government's "lack of will and ability to compromise on fundamental issues including Jerusalem and refugees, in contrast to Olmert's extraordinary concessions," and to "the internal recognition that the chance of getting the Gaza Strip back is slim." The author says that the Palestinian Authority now prefers to "gnaw away at Israel's international position and turn it into a global pariah," and concludes that "The chance for a genuine resumption of negotiations with the Palestinians on a permanent settlement is close to nil in the current situation."
Yisrael Hayom discusses the notions of civil disobedience and the refusal to follow orders and avers that "Refusal that stems from parochial, factional or ethnic reasons, and not from the voice of pure conscience that is common to all humanity, is unjustified vis-à-vis moral integrity, which is also common to all humanity. Such refusal is liable to serve any injustice that a forceful group carries out against a weaker group. Whoever gets excited over such refusal shows that he is unable to distinguish between the voice of human conscience and the voice of tribal nonsense."
Haaretz discusses the search for the new attorney general, and justifies Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to choose the next AG from the four candidates with the most support in the selection committee. The editor informs the paper's readers that "Most of the attorney general's work is in constitutional, administrative and economic law, so in selecting a successor to Mazuz, the cabinet must choose the candidate who has proved the most knowledgeable in these fields."
[Alex Fishman, Amos Gilboa and Joshua Sobol wrote today’s articles in Yediot Aharonot, Ma'ariv and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]