CRIES OF PROTEST

Shared grief at the Gevurah Forum

F

or anyone who’s driven the road leading to the government offices over the last year, the marquee next door to the High Court has been a constant reminder of the war.

It’s the outpost of the Gevurah Forum, an organization representing the parents of fallen soldiers who have been advocating for the IDF to finish the job in Gaza and wipe out Hamas once and for all. A conscious counterweight to the Kapan protesters and the Hostage Forum, which have urged an end to the war from the conflict’s early days, the right-leaning Gevurah Forum has been pressuring the government to refuse any hostage deal that doesn’t spell total victory.

By last Thursday, when the terms of the deal were common knowledge across Israel, opponents swung into action, led by two organizations of bereaved families: the Gevurah Forum and the Tikvah Forum.

That evening, several hundred protesters gathered outside the Foreign Ministry, near a tent the bereaved families had erected months earlier, in order to dissuade Netanyahu from going back on his Gaza promises and war goals. When left-wing groups rallied behind their “All Eyes on Rafah” campaign, these families had been Netanyahu’s staunchest defenders. Now, they felt betrayed.

The demonstration had a grassroots feel. It was evident that these families weren’t seasoned activists with substantial resources, but what they lacked in funding, they made up for in creativity. Outside the tent, they arranged a row of 20 coffins draped in Israeli flags — the future victims, they claimed, of the released terrorists.

Despite the somber imagery, the protest had an intimate feel: Many families in attendance were connected by shared grief — brothers, fathers, sons, or close friends lost in the war. Yet the mood was not one of despair. On the contrary, these families, deeply scarred by conflict, exuded a striking vitality born of their conviction on the necessity of total victory.

Nationalist-religious yeshivah students were prominent in the crowd, injecting creativity into the chants. Popular slogans included: “Gam Sinwar b’iskah shuchrar!” (“Even Sinwar was freed in a deal!”) and “Mechablim meshuchrarim hem hanukbot haba’im” (“Released terrorists are tomorrow’s elite Hamas commandos”).

Yoshua Shani, father of the fallen soldier Ori Mordechai Hy”d and leader of the  Gevurah Forum, took the stage to deliver a pointed critique. Speaking to Mishpacha before addressing the crowd from a flatbed truck-turned-podium, Shani accused the US of strong-arming Netanyahu into the agreement.

“Trump picked up the phone and told Netanyahu this deal has to go through. And Netanyahu can’t stand up to him. He could stand up to Biden, but not to Trump,” Shani said. While acknowledging the need to yield to allies at times, he was adamant that “you can’t hand out candy to Trump at the expense of Israeli citizens’ security.”

Shani repeatedly invoked the bitter lessons of the Gilad Shalit deal, referencing the IDF soldier captured by Palestinian terrorists in 2006 and released five years later in exchange for 1,027 prisoners — among them Yahya Sinwar.

“If anything, this is worse,” he warned. “The Shalit deal planted the seeds for the Simchat Torah tragedy on October 7. With this release, we’re sowing the seeds for the next catastrophe.”

Daniel Steinberg, another Forum leader and father of Colonel Yonatan Steinberg Hy”d, echoed Shani’s concerns. Yonatan had been the first IDF casualty on October 7, killed while defending Ofakim from terrorists.

“Some people want to pit us against the hostage families, but that’s a mistake,” Steinberg said. “We support them. We want all the hostages released and none left in Gaza. But we oppose this deal.” According to Steinberg, the proposed terms carried two fatal flaws: “First, the way this agreement is set up in stages means Hamas will never release all the hostages. They’ll always hold on to some as leverage. Second, the war’s goals haven’t been achieved. Hamas still calls the shots — from Turkey, Qatar, and Doha. Instead of confronting this with strength and victory, we deceive ourselves. We tell ourselves we’ve eliminated Sinwar, Haniyeh, Nasrallah. But the truth? We’re the ones on our knees.”

From the makeshift stage, other speakers issued impassioned denunciations. Some warned that Israel was on the brink of becoming just another star on the US flag. Others decried the deal as tantamount to surrender to Hamas.

One of the night’s most electrifying speeches came from Daniella Weiss, founder of the Nachala settlement movement. Raising her voice to a piercing cry, she reminded the crowd of past promises — Oslo, the destruction of Gush Katif, the Shalit deal — and urged the government not to repeat history.

Asaf Zoldam, the primary organizer of the Gevurah Forum, reflected the growing frustration among younger attendees. “This sense of failure weighs on the soldiers, even physically. It’s dangerous for the hostages and for the soldiers,” he said, directing blame at IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi. Though he credited Netanyahu’s leadership during the war’s early stages, Zoldam was unequivocal: “This agreement endangers the lives of thousands of Israelis.”

As the night wore on, younger protesters sought to escalate their actions, blocking roads across the city and creating traffic chaos. The air was thick with anger, betrayal, and a gnawing sense of inevitability — the haunting certainty that the deal would be signed despite their efforts.

When the rally ended, it seemed almost unimaginable that government figures like Itamar Ben-Gvir or Bezalel Smotrich could return to their homes unscathed by the outrage of their voters. Half an hour later, Ben-Gvir announced his ultimatum:

If the government approved the deal, he would resign from his position and leave the coalition.

THE SIGNING

Could There Be a Worse Deal?  

BY

Friday, the swirling rumors had reached an unbearable crescendo. The principal problem lay in the rampant theorizing about the supposed agreement, with every media outlet offering its own version of the conditions. Netanyahu was deep in meetings with ministers and political allies, even as Itamar Ben-Gvir’s threats to topple the government dominated every front page.

Then, finally, came the official announcement: “Declaration 2689: Outline for the Release of the Hostages.” Reading the document demanded an intellectual distance, yet the sheer bleakness of its terms was inescapable.

In the first phase, Israel committed to releasing 735 prisoners and 1,167 detainees in exchange for 33 hostages — both “alive and dead.” The initial release of hostages was to be excruciatingly gradual: first, three women, followed a week later by four additional captives, and so on, over six weeks. During this period, a ceasefire would be in effect.

Among the prisoners to be freed were notorious figures like Zakaria Zubeidi, commander of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade and responsible for a 2002 attack that killed six people; Mahmoud Atallah, who murdered a woman he suspected of collaborating with Israel; and Ahmed Barghouti, sentenced to 13 life terms for a litany of terrorist acts. These included a bombing at Tel Aviv’s Seafood Market that killed three and injured 30, the murder of a female police officer in Jerusalem’s Neve Yaakov neighborhood, an attack in Hadera that claimed six Israeli lives, and a bombing on Jaffa Street in Jerusalem that killed two women.

The agreement read like a grim ledger, assigning a “price” for each hostage: a living female or child under 19 would be exchanged for 30 Palestinian criminals, either women or minors. A male hostage over 50 years old would be traded for 30 male prisoners of the same age. Nine sick or wounded hostages were to be exchanged for 110 Palestinian criminals. The release of an Israeli female soldier would demand the freedom of 50 prisoners. And so it went.

The deal was set to take effect on Sunday, January 19. The ceasefire would begin at 8 a.m., with the release of the first three hostages — whose names were still unknown — scheduled for 4 p.m. But there were many long hours to endure before then.

On Friday, as Minister Ben-Gvir formalized his exit from the government, the Hostages Forum called for a massive rally in support of the decision. The gathering, scheduled for that Motzaei Shabbos at 8 p.m., was expected to be one of the largest demonstrations in months.

HOSTAGE SQUARE

Trump, the Left’s New Hero

AS

they’ve done every Motzaei Shabbos, the Hostages Forum organized a march in what has come to be called “Hostage Square” in Tel Aviv. The difference between this rally and the opposition one on Thursday was striking — both in tone and in execution.

The first shock was the sheer size of the crowd. It would take an expert to provide an exact count, but anyone could see that several thousand people had turned out. Then there was the inevitable comparison of production value. While the Gevurah Forum’s protest had felt homemade, this event was a polished spectacle: giant screens, balloons, megaphones, and torches. Granted, the Hostages Forum staged weekly rallies, but this one had a special significance. The government of the protesters’ nemesis, Binyamin Netanyahu, had signed the agreement to release some hostages — allegedly “against his will.”

The most surreal aspect of the evening, however, was the profusion of American flags. In the dystopian reality that has gripped Israel over the past 15 months, it seemed unthinkable that the standard-bearers of leftist politics would march alongside the Stars and Stripes, extolling Trump’s role.

“Yes, I wanted Trump to lose,” admitted Yair, 54, who attended with his wife and son, the latter carrying an Israeli flag. “But now I’m very happy with his decision.”

Yair supported the agreement, despite its flaws. “We need to start bringing our people home,” he insisted.

When asked about the role of terrorists like Yahya Sinwar — himself released in a prior deal — in orchestrating last year’s massacre, Yair dismissed the comparison. “Those who bring up Shalit only want to muddy the waters. The government has an obligation to guarantee its citizens’ safety. Nobody thinks Hamas loves us, but when our own are held hostage, we must free them. The failure here is the government’s. In fact, it was Netanyahu himself who freed Sinwar and had countless opportunities to kill him but didn’t. He must take responsibility, pay the price — first, by bringing our people back, and then by resigning.”

Calls for Netanyahu’s resignation were a common refrain among the demonstrators, so much so that repeating them would be redundant. But one thing was clear: At the Hostages Forum rallies, blame was laid squarely on the Israeli government, not the Hamas savages.

Just as the deal’s opponents promoted theories — insisting that pro-Trump lobbies had pressured Netanyahu into signing — supporters of the agreement harbored their own suspicions.

“Netanyahu is the one who wants a piecemeal deal to keep the war going,” Ofir, 20, told me. In his view, the prime minister was “responsible for all of Israel’s problems.”

Ori, 61, attended the march alone and expressed certainty that the deal was “the best option for now. Our brothers have been underground for over a year, and they’re innocent. They were dancing at a festival, or sleeping in their homes in places where the government should guarantee security,” he said.

As for the prisoner exchange, he shrugged. “Unfortunately, that’s Israel’s history. But we’re a strong people. What matters is getting the hostages out as soon as possible, at any cost.”

Ori also took a moment to thank Donald Trump, though he lamented that “our government only made this decision under pressure, not of its own will.”

The most emotional encounter of the evening was with a survivor of Kibbutz Be’eri who didn’t want to provide any identifying details. He was devastated that “his people” were still being held hostage.

“Of course, we need to get them all out! They’re our brothers!” he exclaimed. “I don’t care what the other side thinks —why should I? What would you do if your brother, your son, or your father were trapped in Gaza?”

 THE BEREAVED

“This Isn’t about Politics”

A

way from the heat and controversy sparking between Jerusalem and Tel Aviv are many families who are directly affected but keep a lower profile. They too are torn, but their apolitical stance is tested by the disaster of a deal.

One such voice is Hillel Fuld, an American-Israeli technology business advisor with a strong social media presence. His brother, Ari Fuld, was stabbed to death by a Palestinian in 2018, and it’s believed that the perpetrator may be released as part of the deal.

“This is a nuanced situation,” he told Mishpacha. “It’s not black or white, and I think that there are two parallel lines here that do not meet. One is the terrible, terrible number of terrorists we’re releasing, some of whom are just monsters. And then, on the other side, we have the unbelievable, beautiful sight of seeing our three girls come home, and hopefully more of us return to their families. So those two things coexist, and that’s fine. It’s beautiful and it’s terrible at the same time.”

Hillel reflected on his brother’s murder. “Ari was killed six years ago by a Palestinian teenager who stabbed him in the neck and then ran to attack someone else. Ari shot him, preventing him from killing another woman. Ari became a national hero. Meanwhile, this teenager, now grown, was sentenced to life in prison. During this time, his family has been receiving a salary because he killed a Jew, and now he’s on the list of terrorists set to be released under the deal, in the next phase.”

For Hillel, as for many, the emotions are mixed. “On the one hand, it’s terrible —not just personally, but universally — when a family loses someone and then that terrorist walks free. But on the other hand, Ari, in a way, is still saving lives even after his death, enabling our hostages to come home.”

Unlike many, however, Hillel prefers not to delve into politics. “It’s objectively not a good deal. I don’t know how anyone could say it’s a good deal. I’m sure there are things happening behind the scenes between Trump and Bibi — I’m sure it’s not just what you see on the surface. But the deal on its own, taken at face value, is a terrible deal. Still, I’m fortunate and happy that I’m not a politician. I don’t have to make that kind of decision.

“These families need to know that we don’t abandon our people. That’s what Judaism teaches us — pidyon shvuyim is critically important. We have to bring our people back, knowing full well that the price will be steep. I think it’s time to turn to G-d and say, ‘Hashem, we did what we can. Now it’s Your turn. Do Your thing. Work Your magic.’

And what would Ari have said about this deal? “He would have said, ‘G-d forbid to go through with this.’ He would never, ever have supported it.”

Another person choosing to steer clear of political debates is Tamar Tzohar, grandmother of Omer Neutra Hy”d. Omer, a young American, enlisted with the IDF out of a deep sense of duty to Israel. He was abducted and killed on October 7, but for 14 months, his family held out hope that he was alive. Today, Hamas holds his body, and Tamar hopes that at some point in the agreements, his remains will be returned so they can give him a proper burial.

“We don’t belong to any group or advocacy organization,” she says. “We want everyone home as soon as possible — the living and the dead. I think this deal might at least be a beginning, but I understand that the price is very high, and it doesn’t make me happy. Still, after 15 months since October 7, I feel we need to start bringing them back. Is it right or wrong? I don’t know. I don’t get involved in politics. I’m simply Omer’s grandmother, and I want to be able to bring him to kever Yisrael.”

THE CHOSEN THREE

Everything Else Aside, Who Didn’t Tear Up?

Sunday, January 19, marked the long-awaited date for the release. But the day began on a shaky note, and more than a few believed the agreement might collapse. Hamas had committed to providing the list of three names of the young women to be freed — a condition for Israel to commence the ceasefire. But the list did not come.

The prime minister’s office issued a statement warning that Hamas was breaching the terms and that Israel would not halt operations in Gaza until the list of those to be released was delivered. A Hamas spokesperson claimed the delay was due to “technical issues,” explaining that messages had to be relayed through couriers, a process taking longer than expected.

Hours later, the names of the “chosen ones” were finally revealed: Emily Damari, Romi Gonen, and Doron Steinbrecher.

Damari, 28, a British-Israeli citizen, had been captured in her home in Kfar Aza on October 7. She had been shot in the hand during the abduction, ultimately losing two fingers. Gonen, 23, was taken while attending the Nova Festival. Steinbrecher, a 31-year-old Romanian-Israeli veterinarian, was also abducted from her home in Kfar Aza.

As rumors swirled about the exact location of their release, confirmation came that, after reuniting with their families, the women would be taken to Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan. By 5 p.m., the hospital was teeming with local and international journalists.

“We’ve been covering the events since day one,” the producer for NBC News told me. She lives in Israel, though the on-camera journalist had flown in specifically for the hostages’ release. “In the US, this is a very important story, and we couldn’t not be here.”

Regine Delfour, a journalist for France’s CNews, shared that this was her ninth trip to Israel since October 7. She regularly commutes between Paris and Israel, where, in her words, “The hostages’ plight is closely followed.” Her producer noted the constant influx of messages from the thousands of French nationals living in Israel who rely on their network for updates. “What these young women endured is tragic,” Delfour said.

Nearby, the beaming correspondent for CNN Portugal, Henry Galski, commented, “For some reason, this issue resonates deeply in Portugal. Besides, there’s widespread curiosity about Israel and Judaism there.”

The RAI TV crew, representing Italy’s public broadcasting network, planned to stay for two weeks before being replaced by colleagues, with coverage continuing for at least the first 42 days of the agreement. Their producer admitted, almost sheepishly, that not all Italians support Israel in the conflict.

Farther back stood crews from the BBC, Russian television, German journalists —and inside Sheba, a makeshift studio dominated by every Israeli network.

Among the crowd was Yosef, the father of a hospitalized child, who had stepped out for a cigarette and lingered to see what was happening. Chatting with a security guard, he exclaimed, “Exciting, isn’t it?”

At exactly 8:35 p.m. on January 19, 2025 — 471 days after the horrific events of October 7 — we heard the helicopter circling over the hospital. Journalists inside hurried out to the entrance, cordoned off by security forces. Minutes later, the first ambulance sped through, followed shortly by two more under heavy police escort. Curious onlookers — hospital patients and staff alike — had gathered and broke into applause and cheers as the final vehicles arrived. It was a collective exhale. Everything else aside, who didn’t tear up at the site of these women, having lived through the horrors of Hamas captivity for over a year, falling into their loved ones’ arms?

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1046)