The imminent release of hostages from Gaza under President Trump’s peace deal, which was announced yesterday, is cause for celebration and will bring relief to families who have endured two years of anguish. But this moment masks a strategic catastrophe that threatens to perpetuate an endless cycle of abduction and murder.
At the heart of Israel’s vulnerability lies an unspoken social contract: citizens serve in the military, and the state promises to do “everything” to bring them home—through rescue or negotiation at a “heavy price.” This principle of mutual responsibility, the cornerstone of Israeli society’s resilience, has become a strategic liability.
This principle of mutual responsibility, the cornerstone of Israeli society’s resilience, has become a strategic liability.
Israel’s demonstrated willingness to pay extraordinary prices—releasing 1,150 prisoners in the 1985 Jibril deal for three soldiers, or 1,027 for Gilad Shalit—has transformed every Israeli into a high-value target. Enemies understand that capturing one Israeli achieves strategic objectives impossible on the battlefield.
The social contract must evolve. The state’s promise cannot remain “we will trade for you.” It must become “we will destroy those who capture you.” This shift from retrieval-through-concession to deterrence-through-retribution changes the enemy’s expected outcome from strategic victory to total annihilation, removing the incentive for hostage-taking entirely.
Ancient Israel understood what modern leaders have forgotten. King Saul fell on his sword rather than face capture by the Philistines. Samson chose death over continued humiliation as a prisoner. These warriors recognized that becoming a hostage meant becoming a weapon against their own people.
Those invoking biblical precedent to justify hostage negotiations misread the texts. Abraham rescuing Lot and David recovering the people of Ziklag involved decisive military action, not negotiation. The precedent supports rescue operations, not concessions that legitimize hostage-takers.
Most critically, Jewish law itself prohibits what modern Israel practices. The Mishnah explicitly states: “We do not redeem captives for more than their market value, for the sake of the good order of the world.” The ancient rabbis understood that paying exorbitant prices encourages more kidnappings, ultimately causing greater suffering.
A critical distinction exists between legitimate prisoner of war exchanges and terrorist hostage negotiations. The Geneva Conventions establish protocols for POW exchanges: typically symmetrical trades between sovereign states at the cessation of hostilities, involving uniformed combatants lawfully captured in battle.
Israel’s hostage exchanges occur with non-state actors operating outside any legal framework. The captives include civilians unlawfully abducted from their homes—a war crime under international law. Yet Israel consistently agrees to wildly asymmetrical trades: 1,000+ Palestinians for 30 hostages in 2025, 240 for 105 in 2023, 435 for one civilian and three bodies in 2004.
The 2011 Shalit deal directly enabled the October 7 massacre—among those released was Yahya Sinwar, who masterminded the deadliest attack in Israeli history.
History provides a damning verdict. The 2011 Shalit deal directly enabled the October 7 massacre—among those released was Yahya Sinwar, who masterminded the deadliest attack in Israeli history. Hamas leader Ahmed Jabari confirmed the prisoners released in that deal were collectively responsible for killing 569 Israeli civilians.
The Israeli association of terror victims reports that 180 Israelis lost their lives to terrorists freed in prisoner exchanges since 2000. In 2015 alone, six Israelis died in incidents involving Shalit-deal prisoners who returned to militant activity.
As one Israeli negotiator revealed, “Shalit was kidnapped by Sinwar’s brothers in order to free Sinwar"—the operation succeeded precisely as intended. The released terrorist then learned Hebrew in Israeli prison, studied Israeli society for 22 years, and used that knowledge to plan October 7.
Western leaders fail to grasp how terrorist groups view these negotiations. For Hamas, hostage-taking isn’t desperation but a proven strategy delivering strategic victories. One captured Israeli frees a thousand Palestinian fighters. Those thousand kill hundreds of Israelis. The cycle continues because Israel treats each crisis as isolated rather than recognizing the systemic problem.
Israel must fundamentally shift its approach. First, declare that it will never again negotiate for hostages with terrorist organizations—removing the incentive entirely while maintaining normal prisoner exchanges with legitimate state actors. Second, any terrorist group taking Israeli hostages must face immediate existential consequences—not limited operations but complete organizational destruction.
Third, pursue root cause elimination—destroying not just military infrastructure but the entire ecosystem enabling hostage operations: tunnel networks, command structures, financial systems, and political leadership.
This acknowledges the human cost. Some rescue attempts will fail. Some hostages may not survive. But the alternative—perpetual cycles of abduction and release—guarantees far greater suffering. When Israel chose military action over negotiation in 1994 with soldier Nachshon Wachsman, the rescue failed and Wachsman died—but it sent a clear message that kidnapping wouldn’t be rewarded.
The social contract must evolve from a promise to trade for captives to a promise to annihilate their captors—only then will the cycle finally break.
After the current hostages return, Israel faces a defining choice. It can return to the failed paradigm of management and containment, guaranteeing future October 7ths. Or it can use this moment to fundamentally restructure its approach to asymmetric warfare.
Changing the social contract requires national courage. Israel must tell its soldiers and citizens that their protection comes not from negotiating their release but from ensuring no enemy survives the attempt to take them. The Israeli Cabinet’s 26-3 vote approving the Shalit deal represented not compassion but strategic blindness.
Israel’s enemies have learned that kidnapping works. The only way to unlearn this lesson is through decisive action making hostage-taking suicidal for those who attempt it. History will judge Israel not by how many hostages it recovers through negotiation but by whether it finds the courage to end the hostage crisis permanently. Sometimes the most humanitarian act is refusing to negotiate with those who weaponize humanity itself. Israel’s moral responsibility demands nothing less than complete victory over the infrastructure of terror. The social contract must evolve from a promise to trade for captives to a promise to annihilate their captors—only then will the cycle finally break.
