Yesterday an IDF soldier was indicted for shooting a wounded, prone terrorist in the aftermath of a stabbing attack. The case has sparked much controversy in Israel—along with the usual censure and handwringing abroad—as the soldier’s defenders claim that he responded to a credible threat, while others assert that he committed murder. Noting a similar, if more clearcut, case involving a British marine in Afghanistan in 2011, likewise caught on video, Ben-Dror Yemini draws some conclusions:

[The British soldier, Alexander Wayne] Blackman, was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum of ten years. . . . There was no argument over the facts. The video revealed the full picture, including the fact that Blackman was aware he was violating the Geneva Conventions. . . .

The conviction intensified the protests [against Blackman’s prosecution]. The British defense secretary, Michael Fallon, ordered soldiers not to attend demonstrations in solidarity with Blackman, because these were “political” demonstrations. Fallon’s order was ignored as thousands rallied, including 700 members of the marines, both on active duty and in the reserves. Many of the demonstrators were in uniform. . . . There was a heated argument in military circles [about whether Blackman deserved his punishment].

The British case is not presented here to justify the unusual incident. Israel should be proud of the ethical norms that its commanders enforce. . . . The [Blackman] case is described here because we sometimes have to observe others to understand that we are a lot more normal than the way our media often depict us. The incident is cited here in the context of those, and there are too many of them, who stigmatize Israel. That’s enough, guys. . . . We’re tired of the endless celebration of self-made demonization.

Tamir Hayman analyzes the latest reports about an offer by Hamas to release three female soldiers in exchange for 150 captured terrorists, of whom 90 have received life sentences; then, if that exchange happens successfully, a second stage of the deal will begin.

If this does happen, Israel will release all the serious prisoners who had been sentenced to life and who are associated with Hamas, which will leave Israel without any bargaining chips for the second stage. In practice, Israel will release everyone who is important to Hamas without getting back all the hostages. In this situation, it’s evident that Israel will approach the second stage of the negotiations in the most unfavorable way possible. Hamas will achieve all its demands in the first stage, except for a commitment from Israel to end the war completely.

How does this relate to the fighting in Rafah? Hayman explains:

In the absence of an agreement or compromise by Hamas, it is detrimental for Israel to continue the static situation we were in. It is positive that new energy has entered the campaign. . . . The [capture of the] border of the Gaza Strip and the Rafah crossing are extremely important achievements, while the ongoing dismantling of the battalions is of secondary importance.

That being said, Hayman is critical of the approach to negotiations taken so far:

Gradual hostage trades don’t work. We must adopt a different concept of a single deal in which Israel offers a complete cessation of the war in exchange for all the hostages.