On Tuesday 18 October Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier who had been held by Hamas since June 2006, was released. This release followed years of negotiation, and in return for Shalit’s release Israel agreed to release 1026 Israeli Arab and Palestinian prisoners.

From the outset the whole transfer seemed to be the right and logical thing to do.  Shalit’s family gets back their son, and in exchange some prisoners are released. Israeli public opinion was very much in favour of the transfer, with support for the move even from some of the widows whose husbands were killed by prisoners Israel will release under the deal. It has also given Prime Minister Netanyahu a domestic triumph at a time when he has come under criticism as is Israel becoming increasingly isolated internationally. In short, everybody wins.
But not everybody did win with this release. Several days before Shalit’s release a memorial to the assassinated former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was vandalised by a man unhappy with the planned prisoner exchange. The man’s parents and three siblings had been killed in a terrorist attack committed by one of the men being released. This act was a reminder that in exchange for Shalit, many victims of terrorist attacks, and their families, would not be getting justice.

Other relatives of the victims of those to be released have also opposed the transfer. Ze’ev Rapp, the father of murdered 15 year-old Israeli schoolgirl Helena Rapp, has publically opposed the transfer, stating that “those who support this move don’t understand the grief they’re causing us.”

The families opposed to the transfer may have felt differently had they seen the transfer as a meaningful step towards peace. Thousands of terrorists, both loyalist and republican, were released in Northern Ireland following the Good Friday Agreement.  As bitter a taste as such an agreement left for some, it could be said that it achieved peace and put an end to decades of conflict. It is likely that any lasting settlement between Israel and Palestinians would contain provisions releasing Palestinian prisoners similar to the Good Friday Agreement. This however is not a lasting settlement, and certainly doesn’t end the violence.

Instead it could be argued that the transfer itself encourages Hamas to try and secure further prisoner releases by kidnapping more Israeli soldiers. In the city of Rafah in the Gaza Strip, Hamas supporters celebrated the release by chanting, “We want a new Gilad Shalit.” Instead of encouraging peaceful discussions between the two sides, it’s possible that this deal may in fact encourage further violence. This could in turn strengthen the hand of the Israeli right-wing by suggesting that negotiating with groups such as Hamas won’t bring peace.  All of this would naturally make peace harder to achieve.

Looking at the wider impact, it’s unlikely that the deal will signal a shift in relations between Israel and Hamas. The timing of the transfer is rather fortunate for both Hamas and Prime Minister Netanyahu. Hamas has been rather starved of international attention of late, as Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah party have taken on a more international role by pursuing UN recognition for a Palestinian state based on the 1967 Armistice borders.  Israel may also have chosen the timing in an effort to punish Fatah for their actions at the UN. The release may actually undermine Abbas and Fatah’s recent gains and improve the popularity of Hamas.  Undermining Fatah could damage the peace process and make finding a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict even harder.

No matter what choice was made people were going to be hurt. The choice itself was an impossible one: how much is a human life worth? Ultimately it was decided that nothing could ever bring back the victims of those to be released, but it was still possible to save Gilad Shalit. This move may help Israel and Palestine move closer to peace, but there are no short cuts and an end to the conflict is not on the immediate horizon. This deal may help the region move more towards reconciliation, but the messages are mixed. On the file of each of the Palestinian prisoners pardoned in the deal, the Israeli President Shimon Peres wrote “I neither forgive nor forget”. Surely for real peace, we’ll need both.