It happened about 20 years ago. Morris Pollard, Jonathan Pollard’s father, called my home in Washington. Unlike other relatives and public figures who fought for the release of his son, Morris never complained about anyone. He never protested that the government of Israel wasn’t doing enough to bring about Jonathan’s release and didn’t even claim that his son risked his life on behalf of Israel’s security. In a sad voice and a restrained tone, the prisoner’s father shared with me the deep pain that he felt and asked if I had any advice. I recalled that conversation with sadness when I heard three years ago that Morris had passed away at the age of 95, without seeing his son released from his prison cell.

Jonathan Pollard betrayed his country, but as the late US Ambassador to Israel Samuel Lewis told Amir Tibon of Walla! in January, 28 years in prison is more than enough time served. Even vindictiveness needs boundaries. Another year or two in prison will neither increase nor decrease the deterrent effect of his imprisonment on other potential traitors and spies. At the same time, the removal of the name Pollard from its agenda will free the American Jewish community from an affair that cast a heavy shadow over its loyalty to its country. A miserable individual like Pollard, whose physical and mental health is deteriorating by the day, should have already been sent home, regardless of the difficult state of the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.

In the same article, retired senior diplomat Thomas Pickering also expressed his opinion about Pollard’s release. The former undersecretary of state and ambassador to Israel and the UN said, “Diplomats have to take challenges and turn them into opportunities.'' He also declared, “Achieving a framework agreement is far more important than the continuation of Pollard's incarceration.” Pickering was absolutely right. Still, it seems that the idea that Pollard’s release will pave the way for the much longed-for framework agreement is little more than wishful thinking. Believing that Pollard’s release will change the rules of the game in the diplomatic process is a lot like using cupping therapy on the dead. What was depicted as a weapon that the Americans held back in case of emergency could, at best, extend the agony of the negotiations by a few more months.

Pollard’s arrest was not directly related to the conflict, and his release will not help end it and promote reconciliation between the two rivals. Actually, the contrary is true. The case of the prisoner is completely different from that of freedom fighters like South Africa’s late President Nelson Mandela, whose release was a formative event in that reconciliation process.