Freeing Palestine's Prisoners

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

April 17 marks the annual anniversary of Palestinian Prisoners’ Day, during which the traditional activities recur in the Palestinian street: marches, demonstrations, seminars, and speeches. Calls for the necessity of solidarity with the prisoners usually rise, and those calling for it emphasize the role of the Palestinian Authority in working with Israel to open the doors of the detention centers.

To begin, I note that Palestinian Prisoners’ Day coincides with the anniversary of the first prisoner-exchange operation carried out between the Palestinian resistance — specifically the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine–General Command — and Israel. Israel was forced to open the doors of its detention centers in order to recover one of its own soldiers held by the Palestinian resistance, and was forced to recognize this resistance as an effective actor in the Arab region with wide influence that could not be ignored. From this anniversary, lessons can be drawn as to whether the Palestinian people are capable of freeing their prisoners with pride and dignity. Indeed, the exchange operations that took place afterward, particularly with the Popular Front–General Command and with Hezbollah, reinforce these lessons. Israel was compelled to retreat considerably from its declared positions regarding the release of Palestinian prisoners under the pressure of its own soldiers who had fallen captive, and to release hundreds of prisoners serving heavy sentences who had carried out lethal military operations against Israeli targets.

Exchange Operations

The Popular Front–General Command, led by Ahmad Jibril, held a true Palestinian celebration on May 20, 1985, when it succeeded in achieving a highly successful prisoner-exchange deal. I remember that day exactly, when the crowds of the city of Nablus poured into the streets in overwhelming joy and a joyous national celebration, with feelings of pride and dignity, and lined up along the main Rafidia Street leading toward Junaid Prison — then considered the central prison in the West Bank — to receive the heroic prisoners who had been released. The prisoners emerged after hours of waiting by the massed crowds, aboard buses provided by the Red Cross, which oversaw the implementation of the agreement, amid the ululations of women, the men’s cries of “Allahu Akbar,” and the cheers of young men and women.

In that deal, 1,150 Palestinian prisoners serving heavy sentences were released. Israel yielded before the firmness of the Palestinian negotiator and agreed to release detainees it had said had blood on their hands and would never be released. Prisoners serving life sentences came out, along with those behind distinguished military operations that had been harsh on Israel.

The militant Ahmad Jibril proved at the time that he was not only a tough fighter and a strategic military commander, but also a skillful negotiator distinguished by patience, endurance, and a high degree of tactical ability. He fully understood Israel’s weak points, understood the requirements for success in negotiations, and mastered to perfection the game of drawing Israel into making gradual concessions in its positions until it agreed to the General Command’s terms. Zionist newspapers at the time discussed Jibril’s negotiating ability, and thanked God that the Israeli soldiers captured in 1983 were not all in Jibril’s hands. The Israeli government did not escape the criticism of the Zionist media and the harsh commentary of Israeli parties. The government was described as a government of defeat and concession, and the Israeli prime minister was portrayed as a dwarf before Jibril.

What was beautiful and nationalistic, and reflected a high degree of commitment to principles, values, and the causes of the nation, was that the militant Ahmad Jibril insisted on the release of Arab detainees as well. Syrian detainees from the Golan were released, and I visited them in their homes and saw with my own eyes the national celebration that our people in the Golan held in jubilation. Lebanese militants were also released, out of the General Command’s conviction that the destiny is one, the blood is one, and the enemy is one.

Before that, Arafat had carried out an exchange with Israel in return for five soldiers held by Fatah. That deal was not an honorable one for the Palestinians, because it was done hastily and without scrutiny, and without carefully examining the details of who ought to have been released. Israel released thousands of Palestinians, but the overwhelming majority of them were serving very light sentences, and some were civilian detainees held by Israel. Overall it was a failed deal, and it was never at all commensurate with Palestinian aspirations.

The Palestinian Authority and the Release of Prisoners

The leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization said, following the signing of the agreements with Israel, that it would work to “whiten the prisons” — that is, secure the release of all prisoners in the Zionist prisons. Israel released a number of prisoners after the Taba agreement, but it continued to stall and intensified its arrests among the Palestinians. Palestinian negotiators continuously called on Israel to fulfill its unwritten pledges, but Israel would not respond, and it became clear that the Palestinian negotiator was a feeble negotiator who lacked the capacity to negotiate, and lacked even national knowledge or national commitment. Given the personal past of the negotiators, we did not truly expect a real insistence on releasing the prisoners, and it also became clear to us that the Authority had committed itself, under the agreements, to arresting Palestinians. This is what we witnessed: the Authority proceeded to arrest Palestinian fighters and militants and threw them into Palestinian prisons. So instead of prisoners being released, the Oslo Authority became a helper to Israel in making arrests.

The Palestinian Authority played a great deal with the prisoners’ nerves and did not tell them the truth. It always gave them the impression that relief was near, which negatively affected their psychological and moral state.

The Popular Stance

Palestinian activity today is dominated by calls addressed to the Palestinian Authority to insist on the release of prisoners before signing any agreement with Israel. Indeed, some Palestinian factions have tied the continuation of their commitment to the current truce to the release of all Palestinian prisoners, who number more than seven thousand. There are those on the Palestinian scene now who accuse the Authority of falling short and of not doing what is required to carry out what they call its national duties. Some have not hesitated to open fire on the car of the minister of prisoners’ affairs, or on official security institutions.

…in the greatest numbers, particularly those with heavy sentences whom it describes as having blood on their hands. Palestinian officials have spoken at length about their concern for the prisoners’ cause and their great appreciation for the detainees’ sacrifices, and have promised to do everything in their power to secure their return home. But the objective truth was stronger than they were:

On one hand, Israel does not consider itself an equal at the negotiating table with anyone; rather, it sees others as sitting with it in order to present requests that will be considered. Israel has not treated the Palestinian side as a party to the negotiations so much as it has treated it as a minor who may sometimes deserve pity. Nor should we overlook the fact that Israeli leaders frequently mock the demands that Palestinians voice in the media, considering them part of the wishful thinking of the “backward Arab mind.” On the other hand, Israel sees in the detainees a continuous instrument of pressure on the Palestinian people, one that makes them more tense and anxious and makes their daily lives more difficult and complicated. It uses the prisoners as a means of rewarding the Palestinians when they respond to its demands, releasing a number of them with every such response.

Israel released Palestinian prisoners after the factions agreed to the truce, but without meeting the Palestinian demand for the release of those serving heavy sentences. It released hundreds of those serving light sentences or whose terms of detention were about to end. This release operation was no different from other unilateral operations Israel used to carry out on Islamic occasions such as the arrival of Ramadan and Eid al-Adha. I myself was released along with a group of about 400 prisoners on the occasion of Ramadan, without there being any negotiations or agreements.

The other objective truth that must always be kept in mind is that the Palestinian Authority is required by Israel, and under written agreements, to arrest Palestinians who resist Israel or are suspected of having intentions in that direction. In the 1990s, the Palestinian Authority persistently demanded that Israel release the prisoners, at the very time it was arresting hundreds of members of Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Israel’s detainees are resistance fighters or those who were about to undertake that path, and the Authority’s detainees fall under the very same classification — so is it conceivable that there could be any seriousness in dealing with the prisoners’ issue? This bitter truth stands before the world now: the Palestinian Authority is detaining Ahmad Sa’adat and his comrades, as well as eight people accused of belonging to Islamic Jihad. Israel arrested a number of Palestinians after the last martyrdom operation, and hours later the Authority arrested another number. Israel brought charges against its detainees and settled their case, while the Authority has not yet taken any legal measures against its own detainees.

One of the basic principles of negotiation between warring parties is the release of prisoners, on the premise that the war has laid down its burdens, and humanitarian matters should never be a subject of negotiation. This has not happened in the Palestinian case, and it is clear that the release of some prisoners is a shared concern for both the Authority and Israel. There is no objection to engaging with the issue in the media and in rhetoric, but the standing truth remains stronger than all the media performances. As for the prisoner exchange, it remains a living historical truth in the mind of every Palestinian.

The Captive Zionist Soldier

Ever since the Zionist soldier was captured in the Gaza Strip, statements by politicians and faction members about a prisoner-exchange deal have not stopped. One day the head of the Authority makes a statement about the exchange, and so does the prime minister. Statements are made by the deputy prime minister, faction leaders, the minister of interior, the minister of information, official spokesmen, former detainees, and many others besides. The statements are, for the most part, reassuring, speaking of the deal’s imminent completion. These statements include names such as Barghouti and Sa’adat, and numbers in the hundreds, including women and children.

It seems that some among us find in this matter a sweet game that can put their name on the television screen or broadcast their voice over the airwaves. I find that this jostling for attention reflects a lack of maturity and a disruption of the calm that negotiations on this issue require, as though the prisoners needed fathers and father-figures to adopt their cause.

The repeated and optimistic statements have a negative effect on the psychological and moral state of the Palestinian detainees. What draws the prisoner’s attention most strongly is release — returning home and escaping the deaf walls, the barbed wire, the headcount, and the searches. His morale rises every time he senses a chance to get out of detention, and it is negatively affected when the news brings something displeasing. Palestinian statements are issued over the course of several months giving the prisoners hopes of release, while in return there are Zionist statements affirming that the deal is far from implementation. Between the one and the other, the Palestinian prisoner pays the price. I was a prisoner myself, and I know full well that this rising and falling poses a danger to the psychological integrity of the prisoner.

It would have been more fitting for the Palestinian captors to assign a single body to negotiate the prisoner exchange in complete confidentiality — not for the sake of secrecy itself, but in order to preserve a calm atmosphere for the detainees — and for that body to retain the sole right to speak about the matter in whatever manner it deemed appropriate. There was an earlier exchange in 1985, led by the General Command under Ahmad Jibril, which was a calm and successful exchange that achieved a true Palestinian celebration. And there are the Hezbollah experiences we know of, which reflect a masterful performance in carrying out exchanges.

It is important for the matter of the prisoner exchange to be a fundamental issue in Palestinian security strategy. What benefits us and benefits the detainees is tireless work toward freeing our prisoners, not using the prisoners’ card to achieve personal gains. Instead of the many speeches we deliver on Prisoners’ Day, we should think about the means and methods that would deny Israel the ability to lock the doors on our sons for decades.

Ahmad Jibril, King of Negotiation

When nations see that among them is someone distinguished by particular capabilities, they hold on to that person and rely on him, because of the great benefit his efforts bring to everyone. Jibril has proven himself to be a capable fighter, a seasoned negotiator, and a man of principle and firm will, and I believe he is worthy of taking charge of the exchange concerning the Zionist soldier. Experience shows that factions and individuals try to build media glory at the expense of the prisoners, and experience has shown that the most successful people are those who place the interest of the prisoners above their own personal glory. For this reason, the captors of the Zionist soldier would do well to hand the trust of the negotiations over to Ahmad Jibril.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “تحرير أسرى فلسطين” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.