...Which leaves Way 3: To accede to the abductors' demands and negotiate with them the prisoner exchange they are calling for. Such negotiations have been carried out in the past by Israel with terrorist organizations like Hamas, and it would be perfectly feasible to carry them out now too. Yet they might drag on for an excruciatingly long time and the price of successfully concluding them would be extremely high.

In the 1985 exchange with Ahmed Jibril's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, for example, Israel swapped 1150 convicted terrorists for three of its soldiers. In the 2004 exchange with Hezbollah for kidnapped Israeli businessman Elhanan Tannenbaum, 460 Lebanese and Palestinians were let go. In both of these cases, a large number of those released returned to a life of anti-Israel violence. Gilad Shalit's captors have publicly declared their intention of freeing similar numbers of their brethren from Israeli prisons.

For Israel to give in to such demands now could have catastrophic consequences for the future. There would not be an Israeli at home or abroad who would not be the next potential victim of an abduction. The only way to reduce the price of extortion is not to pay it.

Does this mean that, if Israel is to behave responsibly toward itself and its own citizens, Gilad Shalit's life may have to be forfeit? The awful answer is: Yes. Corporal Shalit was a soldier, two of whose comrades were killed in the same action he was taken prisoner in. If their lives, like that of all combat soldiers, were considered to be riskable in the service of their country, his may have to be also.

Not to be cowed by Palestinian extortion - to put an end to the rocketing of Israeli settlements - to make Hamas realize its limits: These are all legitimate aims of Israel's current incursion into Gaza. Any one of them may have a better chance of succeeding than does freeing Gilad Shalit.