Tribune trashes Shalit

Editorial

Gilad Shalit, the Israel Defence Forces soldier who was held in captivity by Hamas in Gaza for five years, is headed to Vancouver.

The Jewish National Fund of Canada is sponsoring Shalit’s trip, which will also include stops in Toronto, Montreal and Calgary. The visit will presumably be welcomed by Jewish communities that organized vigils, demanded Shalit’s Geneva Conventions rights and ensured his plight was known to those in our government. But not everyone is looking forward to the visit, according to the Jewish Tribune, the newspaper associated with B’nai Brith Canada. (See cover story.)

The Tribune claims that “many are questioning JNF Canada’s decision to bring Shalit … to Canada as a guest speaker” and adds, without attribution, that “some have expressed concern that by appearing worldwide as an invited guest speaker, Shalit – who showed no resistance during his abduction nor made any attempt to protect his fellow IDF soldiers – could now become a new Israeli icon.”

A letter to the editor of the Tribune went further, calling Shalit a “stumblebum” and accusing him essentially of allowing himself to be abducted and for his two fellow soldiers on duty to be killed.

Much has been discussed about the trading of a single Israeli soldier in exchange for 1,027 prisoners, including some who perpetrated multiple murders and terror attacks; individuals who, by one calculation, were responsible for 569 Israeli deaths. This is a valid discussion – and it was heatedly argued at the time of Shalit’s release.

The IDF, the government of Israel and, by extension, the people of Israel commit to the parents of every soldier that they will go to the ends of the earth to protect Israeli sons and daughters who serve their country. Shalit’s was not the first instance in which terrorists were set free in exchange for ransomed humans, alive and dead, and it likely won’t be the last. The people of Israel have considered the issues around this and, at the time of the Shalit swap, a majority of the public was in favor of it. This does not mean the topic is closed. But reopening this discussion should not be accompanied by trashing the reputation, character and praiseworthiness of Shalit.

We’re all for free expression. And we acknowledge a diversity of opinion around the contentious issue of trading murderers for innocent captives. But there is a time, place and manner for addressing these issues. The visit of Shalit to Canada is not the ideal time or place. And making one’s case on the issue of prisoner exchanges by targeting and attacking the decency of a single Israeli – one who was held captive for five-and-a-half years – is not a manner befitting the gravity of the discussion. It was extraordinary, yet entirely understandable, that B’nai B’rith International (which apparently has little, if any, formal affiliation with the organization that calls itself B’nai Brith Canada) went to pains to express its disagreement with the article and separate its reputation from the attack on Shalit.

In its handling of this matter, the Tribune failed on several fronts. They failed factually, the very basis of good journalism, by building a story around an assertion – that “many” people, or, in another formulation, “some” had expressed concern – that was supported by no evidence whatsoever. More egregiously, they failed morally, by attacking Shalit as an individual in order to make a point – about exactly what, we’re not sure.

It is a tenet of Judaism to take up difficult topics and address them openly and thoroughly. Is there another people whose history, ancient and modern, has forced so much consideration of what we call pidyon shvuyim, the mitzvah of redeeming captives? Throughout history, Jewish people have been forced to make brutal decisions and harsh compromises to save the lives of endangered Jews. Even the redemption of our people in the land of Israel has not eliminated such cruel choices. We are not commanded to avoid difficult conversations like this – but we are commanded to avoid lashon harah, speaking ill or perpetuating personal attacks.

The Tribune may be right – maybe “many” or “some” want to relitigate the issue of prisoner swaps – or even question making a hero out of Shalit – but winning those discussions should not require the destruction of an individual’s character and reputation.

We predict that “many” or “most” Jewish Canadians will welcome Gilad Shalit for what he is, a human and a symbol. As a human being, Shalit is many things: fallible, courageous, a young man who suffered terribly and is now beginning his life as a free person. As a symbol, he represents the tenacity of a single Jew facing intolerable circumstances. He is an embodiment of the promise of the Jewish people to free captives. And he reminds every Israeli parent both of the terrible potential their children face when pressed into service for their country and the lengths to which the state of Israel will go to ensure the safe return of a son or daughter.

It is with this greater breadth of understanding and empathy that Canada will welcome Shalit.

^TOP