Hamas Challenges Biden on Ceasefire Agreement
Recent developments indicate a growing contention between Hamas and the United States regarding the new ceasefire proposal in Gaza. Hamas, represented by writer David Hirst in the Middle East Eye, refuses to accept the Israeli ceasefire proposal because it does not guarantee an end to the war or a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces. This rejection was partly in response to US President Joe Biden's speech in which he promised to push for a 'complete and comprehensive' ceasefire.
Hirst argues that while Biden's speech gave the impression of supporting a seamless and full ceasefire, the actual text of the proposal contradicts this. Specifically, the proposed agreement outlines a three-phase approach: a temporary ceasefire in Gaza, the release of detainees, and the reconstruction of the Strip. However, the document does not provide for a 'full and complete ceasefire,' as highlighted by Hirst, leading to apparent contradictions.
The writer points out that the most crucial excerpt, paragraph 14, which states that measures from the first phase will continue into the second phase only if negotiations progress, leaves room for negotiations to fail and for Israel to resume military actions. This uncertainty, coupled with a revised timeline for Palestinians to return to their homes, casts doubt on the feasibility of sustaining peace.
Adding to the concerns, Hirst notes that Israel seeks veto power over the release of 100 Palestinian prisoners who are key figures in resistance movements. This stipulation diminishes Hamas's negotiating position significantly. Such terms, Hirst argues, serve Israel's objectives and could compel Hamas into a surrender.
On the other side, the United States has pushed an amended proposal at the United Nations Security Council to advance the ceasefire deal. The new proposal urges both parties to implement the terms of the ceasefire 'without delay and without conditions.' President Biden's administration underscores the importance of diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar, and the US to stop the fighting, release all abductees, and increase humanitarian aid.
The US proposal outlines a clear three-phase plan: an initial six-week ceasefire to release women, the elderly, and the wounded; a complete ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli forces contingent upon successful negotiations; and a long-term reconstruction plan for Gaza. Despite these efforts, the proposal has been met with skepticism from the Israeli side, particularly regarding points that preclude demographic or territorial changes in Gaza.
In light of these complex dynamics, Hamas insists that Biden enshrine his promises about the ceasefire agreement in a formal, written offer to avoid ambiguities they perceive in the current agreement. The ongoing tension underscores significant differences in the interpretations and expectations of the ceasefire between Hamas and the US, suggesting much work remains to ensure a lasting peace.
- The ongoing conflict in Gaza and the proposed ceasefire have drawn significant international attention and diplomatic efforts. As the primary negotiators, Egypt, Qatar, and the United States play crucial roles in mediating between Hamas and Israel.
- The United Nations Security Council’s involvement highlights the global significance of achieving a peaceful resolution in Gaza. Its latest proposal seeks commitment from all member states to support its implementation and respects international law frameworks.
