Writer David Hirst says that the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) will not be able to accept the Israeli ceasefire proposal because it does not guarantee an end to the war, nor a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces.
In an article on the British Middle East Eye website, the writer reviewed the US administration’s statements and positions and showed that they contain contradictions and unclear expressions.
He recalled that US President Joe Biden announced the Friday before last that he would throw Washington’s weight toward a “complete and complete” ceasefire.
The writer commented that if what Biden said a week ago was indeed throwing his weight behind a similar proposal, progress would have been made, but his description of the 3-stage ceasefire proposal (which includes a ceasefire in Gaza, the release of detainees, and the reconstruction of the Strip) does not match. With the document signed by the Israeli Cabinet.
More importantly, Hirst says the published deal does not provide a “full and complete ceasefire.”
The text says something different
Hirst explained that the text of this deal says something completely different. The main paragraph, paragraph 14, reads in full, “All measures in this first phase, including the temporary cessation of military operations by both sides, aid and shelter efforts, troop withdrawal, etc., will continue in phase 2 as long as negotiations on the terms for implementing phase 2 continue.” “The guarantors of this agreement will continue to make every effort to ensure that these indirect negotiations continue, so that the two parties can reach an agreement on the terms of implementation of Phase 2 of this agreement.”
He commented that the phrase “make every effort” does not mean that there is an obligation for Israel to continue the second phase if the negotiations fail. If it fails, Israel will return to war.
The second major issue, Hirst continued, is that the timeline for Palestinians to be able to return to their homes in northern Gaza has been rescheduled. This means, in theory, that if there is no agreement on the second phase, the war could resume without enough time for the population to act.
Departure from previous deals
He added that this text represents a departure from previous deals, and that Hamas has lost much of its position regarding the prisoners that Israel will release in exchange for the return of the “hostages.” Israel is now demanding to use its veto power against a group of 100 prisoners who constitute the leadership of the main Palestinian resistance movements.
Hirst confirms that Biden serves Israel’s most important goals. It has promoted its most important goals throughout these negotiations. Just as he authorized a major ground offensive against Rafah, Biden supports Israel’s right to continue the war after the initial release of detainees and prisoners.
Signing means surrender
He said that signing a document like this by Hamas leaders means the movement’s surrender, exiting the tunnels and waving a large white flag, noting that everyone knows what happens to people who wave white flags.
He stressed that Hamas is not in the mood to do so. It feels, rightly or wrongly, that it is winning the battle of wills in Gaza. It believes that the Israeli army is on the verge of collapse and defeat, and is confident of its ability to work underground for months to come.
He added that Hamas is now challenging Biden to put what he said in his speech about the proposed agreement in the text of the offer submitted to them. “They want it in writing. They want a guarantee that once the exchange of detainees and prisoners begins, the war will end.”
He concluded by saying that it is quite clear that there are large gaps between Biden’s description of the ceasefire agreement and the ceasefire agreement itself. They are two different things.