Recent happened in recent months with six israelis killed as a result of terrorist activities that some of the people who were released during our last prisoner deal, have been involved in different levels. This raises a huge dilemma for the israeli society. And a huge dlilemma for the government. So these are questions that are very, very difficult to answer. And there are no good answers. You can think of pro and cons for each way that you might choose to answer it, and this is on ongoing effort that we are still, i think, very much in the midst of it. One of the famous israeli experts on this issue suggested, for example, that there have been changes in the way the terrorist organization conducted their kidnapping activities as a result of the way that the government of israel chose to react to them. So there is a significant difference between those kidnapping attacks that went on in the 70s and the ones that we experience since the 80s to this day. The main difference is that in the 70s you would have this incidence where there would be a takeover by terrorists of a facility. It could have been a school, a bath, a house. A known facility and they would take hostages. And then they would start making their demands and the bargaining yes or no would start. That allowed for a situation where instead of actually starting negotiation to release the hostages, the government of israel chose when it was possible to try a military option, a military takeover, taking on the terrorists and releasing the hostages without taking the ransom. So not yielding to terrorism. That, in fact was the policy that was put forward by Prime Minister rabin. When there was a possibility to try and militarily take down the terrorist and release the hostages, you do not negotiate. You do not start the negotiate. However, the second part of it was that when this possibility does not exist, you in fact, do start negotiations and you try to see which of their demands you can answer. And the reason is that you cannot leave people in this situation just abandon them completely. And so we never really had a policy of no negotiation because that would have been, i think, for the israeli society, almost unbearable. One of the reasons that we have to take into consideration, we had Different Cases of hostage taking from school children, families, what have you. But there has been a growing tendency, im afraid, of kidnapping soldiers. And while we share with most of the countries in the world this notion that there is a duty, there is a commitment by states to their citizens, and states do need to do their best to protect the live and the wellbeing of their citizens. There is an additional commitment when it comes to the state of israel because we have conscription and a general drafting. Boy and girls, when they turn 18, go to the army, especially from the Jewish Population in israel. Both boys and girls. They go to the army, they enlist. The country sends them to defend itself. And when they are taken hostage or kidnapped in this context, the country has an additional duty to get them back. This is part of what was mentioned here with respect to the u. S. You dont leave a wounded soldier behind. You dont leave soldiers behind. And it is, i think, a very strong notion in israel. Some would argue its more than a contract that the state of israel has with its soldiers than it is a contract that the state of israel has with the parents. If a mother and father are expected to send kids at the age of 18, they expect from the state of israel to do its best to make sure that if there is a possibility for them to come back home, this is what the state should do. So what happened in the 80s was that since the different terrorist organizations saw that the government prefers to do Everything Possible in order not to conduct negotiation, but is actively trying to release by the way, with a terrible price. We had cases of both hostages and the soldiers that participated in their release attempt were killed. Im sure youre all aware of the famous case where we had an air france airplane that was abducted to uganda and only the israeli hostages stayed. At the airport there. And there was a very heroic release attempt. Actually, most of the hostages got back safe and sound. There was a lady who was hospitalized then and she died. But, actually, we took losses and the famous one was, in fact, the birth of our Prime Minister. In the 80s we saw a change of the strategy and tactics of the terrorist organizations. They understood that as long as they operate in a known place, there would be some attempt to forcefully release the hostages. So what they tried to do from then onwards was actually kidnap an israeli citizen, be it a soldier or a citizen and take him somewhere unknown, preferably outside the state of israel where it would be different for the idf and security organizations to find him. There, actually, you leave the state no other chance but to start an negotiation. If, indeed, there is a moral religious what have you commitment to bring our citizens and soldiers back home. And there started what a lot of people see nowadays as a slippery slope where you had some very famous deals and you could see a trajectory where the price just goes higher and higher. The ratio between the number of the hostages or kidnapped people that were released and the number of prisoners were released by security became bigger and bigger. In fact, in the last 30 years or so we released more than 7,000 people and got 16 people back. So the ratio is Something Like 450 to one. But, in fact, some of those deals, for example, the last deal we actually had 1,027 people released in order to get him back. Now, having said that, with a lot of criticism in israel on the deal, on the ratio, on this slippery slope, one has to say that there is for each deal with all the criticism there was a lot of popular support. I think in that case it was Something Like 80 . Each deal was applauded by the society. No one can resist the picture of a young soldier going back to his father and mother. Its just its the human thing. Its the human reaction. So you have the very rational and logical analysis or where does it put the state of israel. Then you have the emotional, personal, everybody thinks of their sons and daughters when they go to the army. You cannot compare between the two. It is its a heartbreaking issue. We had families of victims of terrorism that tried to protest. Again, for the decision maker, this is a very, very difficult dilemma to make. I should add to that. This is something also unique to the state of israel. That one of the things you should consider when releasing prisoners to get a kidnapped person back, is not just that you are encouraging or creating motivation, you know, incentive for the next kidnap or hostage taking, not just that youre releasing terrorists that by the way, when in jail our experience shows they only get more radicalized, more experience, they get Operational Training from other comrades and they become much more dangerous. By the way, when they are released, they become a role model for young people in their communities. Their release actually helps recruit new members to that terrorist organization. Theres a whole myth that is created around them. And it has the the impact is much more than just releasing one individual or a thousand. An interesting question is what does it do to the deterrence of the state of israel against its different enemies . And the problem is that hostage taking as terrorist actions enlarge are part of an asymmetric war who does not bow to any accepted rule of law. This is the way of getting more and we as a country who defends itself against different threats need to deter our enemies from continuance in this path. There is a lot of questions in israel, when a country accepts that. When you release 1,000 people for one person, does that, in fact, hurt and curtail our deterrence . There are lots of nonstate terrorist organizations in the region. It they theyre all watching, theyre all drawing their conclusion. If their conclusion isnt, look this is a society that is so sensitive to the life of one individual, so we should try to do our own actions or our own hostage taking and get more and make israel do this or do that. And, in fact, the leader of hezbollah likes to talk about the Fragile Society of israel and compare us too all kinds of nonflattering description. But i can also argue i think this is something that a lot of people share in israel, that this is actually a sign of strength of the society. The society is willing to take such big risks. And knowingly, knowingly release arch terrorists and the bloodiest murderers you can think of that killed children and babies knowingly and intentionally from prisons to get one person back. This is a sign of strength. This is a sign of solidarity. This is a sign of commitment. And this makes a society actually stronger. When the society is stronger, the country is also stronger. With all the vulnerabilities that this creates. I dont have i cannot answer one or the other. This is an ongoing debate. I would say, though, that there have been some attempts lately in the last three years or so to try and set new rules. Rules that would in a way limit the discretion of the government and of the Prime Minister, actually, when deciding on in such sensitive and complicated cases. And were all hoping not to face this situation again. I should add, by the way, that this type of kidnapping, this episode that weve been experiencing since the 80s, they usually take a few years because it is so complicated to conduct this kind of negotiation. That this is not an episode of days or hours like was the case when, you know, the hostage taking took place inside israel itself. But people can be in captivity for years. One man was in captivity for five years of his life. While this is going on, the family is going through unspeakable misery. And the society that those people who know them and those people who get closer to them in the process, theyre all going through very emotional and very painful situation. And this is something that is very much very much present in the daily life in israel while it is taking place. And every few years, we have such an episode. So hoping not to reach a new one. There was an attempt to set new rules. The attempt actually started before the last release. The ministry of the defense chaired by the former chief justice of our Supreme Court of justice, and this committee was charged with coming up with new rules. Not just about the price but about all the relevant questions. Who should be responsible for conducting the negotiation and what would be the limitation and so on and so forth. The idea, the decision from the very start was that this will not have affect on the deal because this was an ongoing case. They didnt want to risk it. And so they did not publish, but they concluded their conclusions a short period after he returned to israel. And the conclusions were submit today t ed to the minister of defense because they are binding and confidental. We do not want our enemies to understand what theyre dealing with. If they had the manual it would make them easier for them to come up with the most efficient ways for them to apply in the next incident. But a lot of people presume that the idea is to limit the price. And to arrive at the much more reasonable ratio. You would still have room for maneuvering for the government to conduct the negotiation. You will never reach a situation where, you know, a person is taking hostage. The country says im sorry i cannot negotiate. This would be unacceptable in israel. But the government could not be extorted in the way it has been in reason years by the terrorist organizations that confront us. Because they know theres no limit on the numbers. I should say here, we were asked and we paid a price, also, for some idea on the medical condition of a kidnapped soldier. If hes alive or dead. We were asked to pay for corpse, for dead soldiers, for remains of corpses. Theres no limit to the cynical views of this kind of extortion. People did feel this is a slippery slope. I wont relate to ongoing cases, naturally, but i would say this was a serious attempt to lay down rules. Other attempts that were more public was in some legislation that was introduced. It also limits the authorities before that it was the president s authority to pardon prisoners that were sentenced for life. That would be most of the terrorists that murdered people. But, also, some other heinous terrorists. Its not just about terrorists, its about murderers of this kind at large. And this created a situation where again, hopefully well not get to another situation of this sort. But it would be a different attempt, maybe, and a different experience, also, for the government and mainly the minister of defense who is now who is getting more powers and authorities of this issue in the new set of rules to conduct this in a way that might be more reasonable in the eyes of the society and the government. But, again, i have to say no easy answers. Nobody knows how that would actually work. This is an ongoing dilemma because it is a dilemma that cannot be solved. When human lives are put one against the other. Nobody can say the answer is a or b. Hopefully, i wont have to discuss it next time and say what was our experience and what are the lessons that weve learned. But ill leave you with this hope and im open to take any questions later. [ applause ] okay. Now were coming to our last but not least speaker. Dr. Ullman as i mentioned before is a Senior Advisor to the political counsel. And also to the Business Executives for the National Security. And i think i should really mention that most recently also the distinguished fellow and good friend and a very distinguished journalist. Thank you. His real fame was a young naval officer. He was so damn smart they got rid of him, too. Its all yours. Thank you. Don and yonah, its good to be here. Its always good to be with the 29th commandant of the marine corp. Ive learned a lot of things from him. Most importantly he taught me on a battlefield brains rather than bullets win wars but dont ever discount the power of a bullet. Im going to be fairly brief. I have to apologize because i have another meeting i have to go to. So i may have to leave early. I want to provide ideas that i hope are thought provoking. Let me begin with this, i think one of the greatest dangers posed to us is not so much physical threat to american citizens, other citizens, but the threat to the constitution. What al qaeda has done through terrorism has highlighted the tensions between protecting Civil Liberties and protecting the nation. We do not have a good response. What you see at Guantanamo Bay is a question whether these captured individuals should be treated as criminals or enemy combatants. We have not resolved that. You see the dilemmas in the National Security agency. How far can they go in trying to protect the nation and not violate Civil Liberties. This is ongoing. Its going to get a lot worse. Its something we tend to ignore at our peril. Second, the best armies navies, air forces and marine corp i say that. Are incable of fighting an ideology army that has no army, air force or marine corp. We see that with the Islamic State. The third point is that while we talk about resolving these things with a comprehensive approach, how many of you have not heard the term comprehensive approach or all aspects of government . Not just the department of defense. But because the department of defense is the best resourced, best organized most functional agency in the u. S. Government of size, by default, it takes on all these issues. It cant do that. It cannot solve the terrorism problem. Unless you get to the roots of the terrorism problem which are a combination of idealogy and physical need. Whether deprivation or psychological satisfaction youre not going to be able to deal with t. We have not been very capable because our government system is not organized for this very, very massive comp rehencrehensive de series of dangers. Were oriented on the cold war and bilateral. With a huge enemy such as the soviet union. We have to change our mindset. I have been arguing to a brainsbased strategy for a very long time. As beethoven said, i shall hear in heheaven. Let me tell you about something you may not have considered. First, cyber crime. Anybody not aware of cyber crime, anybody not read the headlines the other day about Ukrainian Cyber thieves who stole 100 million by getting data . I got news for you. Thats going to get even better and better. Because what happens when i get into the records of companies and lets say i want to bet the stock market. I want to bet a price of share goes up and down and i can manipulate that data. Im a 12yearold terrorist living somewhere in ramadi and i have access to the internet. What is going to prevent me or my colleagues from making huge amounts of money by cyber crime and by leveraging these things . Its going to get a lot worse. The annex to that is cyber blackmail. Supposing i am a member of the Islamic State and i decide im going to threaten pep co. Because i can shut down the power grid in washington, d. C. What happens if im with pet co and i get a threat i know is valid . What do i do . By the way, they just happened to shut down part of my power grid. Now, this goes even a step further. Because i believe the Islamic State is going to be conducting cyber blackmail against individuals. Let me give you ragreat case. This is not the Islamic State but a bunch of cyber thieves. A very rich woman, hugely rich, personal assistant got an email from this woman saying would you spend 250,000 because i bought abc. By coincidence the assistant said im going to take care of the deal. The woman said what deal. What happened was the cyber thugs were able to get into these email accounts and were able to forge this womans way of speaking, had all sorts of access. Al now, what happens when the Islamic State thats desperate for dollars decides its going to commit this kind of blackmail . Its going to call up family abc and d and say unless you do the following well kill your relatives. These are things for which we have to repair. The final point ill make by hostages, what happened when the First American serviceperson is captured