The Rebbe Warned Against Hostage Deals, Irreversible Consequences

In light of the recent hostage deal, we share the Rebbe’s stance: such agreements endanger Jewish lives, encourage further terrorism, and abandon principled policies that protect the collective safety of the Jewish people. They set a dangerous precedent, prioritizing temporary solutions over long-term security.

In 1979, Jewish reservist Avraham Amram was captured by Egypt. To secure his release, Israel agreed to free 76 terrorists, including individuals with Jewish blood on their hands, marking the first instance of Israel releasing murderers, who quickly pledged allegiance to the PLO. In response to this shocking exchange, the Rebbe delivered a powerful farbrengen on Motzei Shabbos Parshas Bamidbar 5739.

Additionally, a shocking event occurred, demonstrating to what extent matters have reached:

There was a Jew who was held captive, and his release was agreed upon only in exchange for seventy-six prisoners. This event took place around the same time that the United States signed a similar agreement with the Soviet Union. However, in that instance, five captives were exchanged for two, whereas here, one was exchanged for seventy-some.

It is true that, according to halacha, there is room for debate, as the issue concerns saving the life of a single Jew, and when faced with the need to give much more in return, one can deliberate on this matter.

But in this case, a fundamental factor was added: it was openly stated that since there was no other choice, and since it involved a Jew with a family, they could not begin calculating how many prisoners needed to be released from prison to secure his freedom. When asked, “After all, there have been many instances where captives were taken from Israel, but their release was always negotiated for an equal number or double that—never for seventyfold. You yourselves have declared this as a principled stance, refusing to succumb to any threat—even if there were halachic, logical, or diplomatic justification for doing so—on the grounds that such concessions would only encourage the Arabs to kidnap even more hostages. Hence, there is no alternative but to demonstrate to them that this will not work.” This stance was adhered to for years, even at the cost of Jewish lives resulting from it.

Yet here, shockingly, they suddenly changed course: one for seventy-six!

Despite these claims, there is room to agree with this approach: When a Jew hears the story—that there was no other way to free him but through the release of seventy-some prisoners—they might think, perhaps this is the way. Perhaps there was no alternative, as “one Jewish soul is equivalent to an entire world,” and how much more so when the price involves only seventy-some.

These are the visible aspects, and as mentioned, despite the arguments, there is room for agreement.

But this story also has a hidden aspect:

When celebrations were ordered to mark the agreement, of which the above story was one component, speakers were instructed not to reveal who the released prisoners were. However, since it is impossible to deceive the world indefinitely and on every matter, others, for some reason or another, disclosed that of those seventy-some individuals, half were those who were imprisoned not for minor infractions but were, in fact, active terrorists with Jewish blood on their hands.

Until now, even those who had not engaged in acts of terror were not released because there was a refusal to surrender to terrorism. Yet now, even terrorists were freed.

Since diplomats are unrestrained, they began searching for explanations as to why this course of action was necessary. When asked a simple question: If indeed it was necessary to release them, why, then, did you make a secret of it? You could have said from the outset that for such and such reasons, you were compelled to release murderers who, even in their release, show no sign of repentance and instead declare, “I have eaten, and I will eat again,” may G-d save us!

This is an irreversible act! Seventy-six terrorists are now free and in a place where, Heaven forbid, there is no apparent reason why they will not once again engage in terrorism—may it never be!

It is not just this matter alone that is problematic; the entire method is flawed and dangerous—a method that advocates acting contrary to “I will lead you upright.” A method that involves concealing the truth, even to the extent of lying, claiming that had they not been released, the President of the United States and the President of Egypt would have refused to sign the agreement. This lie is not even credible to children, as in those areas where a firm stance was maintained—both in the past and the present—it succeeded!

As mentioned in the previous gathering: When one is spat upon and knows it is a spit to the face, they deceive others, claiming that these are “rains of blessing!” They even instruct others to recite the blessing “Who is good and does good,” make a feast, offer congratulations, dance in the streets, and wave flags, with all the associated celebrations!

This concerns not only the act of releasing the terrorists itself but also the fact that this act is no secret. The opposing side is fully aware of it and concludes that, since it has succeeded thus far, and despite having spat, struck, and humiliated—Jewish newspapers still print afterward that these are rains of blessing, true peace, “peace for our children and grandchildren.” They even add that aside from this approach, there is no other—Heaven forbid—through which G-d could fulfill “and I will grant peace in the land.” Seeing this, what will the opposing side do but continue this strategy? And indeed, they do continue—Heaven forbid! 

AUDIO:

Discussion

We appreciate your feedback. If you have any additional information to contribute to this article, it will be added below.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


advertise package