Within hours, news from the Middle East filtered into the White House Situation Room fast and furious.
As a prelude to the invasion, Israel ordered 100,000 civilians to evacuate Rafah.
Hamas “accepts” ceasefire agreement, potentially stopping invasion.
Israeli attack on Rafah, possible invasion.
Monday’s fitful developments in the war had White House officials scrambling to track what was happening and what it all meant. Eventually, they came to believe that each move sent a signal that was not what it initially seemed, but reflected an effort to gain leverage at the bargaining table for which a clear solution had yet to emerge.
In fact, rather than “accepting” the ceasefire, Hamas made a counteroffer to a previous proposal backed by the United States and Israel—a counteroffer that was not considered acceptable in itself, but was nevertheless progressive logo. At the same time, it is clear that the Israeli attack on Rafah is not the beginning of a major operation that has long threatened, but rather a targeted retaliation for a weekend Hamas rocket attack that killed four Israeli soldiers – in addition to serving as a warning to civilians. , is also a way to increase pressure on Hamas negotiators.
The series of actions underscores the instability in the region as President Joe Biden and his team try to broker a deal they hope will finally end a war that has devastated Gaza, killed tens of thousands of combatants and civilians, angered the region and triggered Riots on American college campuses. Over the past few days, talks have ranged from high expectations for a deal, to a new impasse that appeared to bring the talks on the brink of collapse, to renewed Hamas initiatives to get the talks back on track.
“Biden is continuing to do everything he can to thread multiple needles at the same time,” said Marla Ruderman, President Barack Obama’s former deputy envoy to the Middle East and now at the Miller Center at the University of Virginia. She said the president was still warning Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that “a ground invasion in Rafah is a terrible idea” while “pressuring Hamas in every way possible to rescue the hostages and provide More humanitarian aid.”
Biden called Netanyahu on Monday to update him on the U.S. assessment of progress in ceasefire talks and renewed pressure on the Israeli leader to halt any full-scale attack on Rafah. The president also had lunch at the White House with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, who like other Arab leaders is eager to end the war.
The diplomatic situation over the past two weeks has been tense and suspenseful since Hamas launched a major terrorist attack on Israel on October 7, killing about 1,200 people and taking more than 200 hostages. After months of stalled negotiations, Israel returned on April 26 with a proposal that U.S. officials believed changed the situation and provided a prime opportunity to reach a deal.
Under the first phase of the proposal, Israel would cease the war for 42 days and release hundreds of Palestinians held in its prisons, while Hamas would release 33 hostages, especially women, elderly men and the sick and wounded .
According to people familiar with the matter, the number of 33 hostages is an increase from the 18 hostages proposed by Hamas, but is lower than the 40 hostages originally requested by Israel, in large part because Israeli officials learned that the hostages who met the criteria were not qualified. He insisted on anonymity to describe the sensitive conversations among more than 33 hostages. In fact, Hamas revealed to the Israelis on Monday that the remains of the 33 hostages included those of both dead and still alive.
Furthermore, once conditions are met, Israel will withdraw its troops from Gaza’s densely populated areas and allow Gazans to return to the northern part of the enclave; to this end, the ceasefire will allow for a significant increase in the flow of humanitarian aid. In an effort to call Hamas’ bluff, the Israelis actually cut and pasted elements from Hamas’ March proposal and put it into their own proposal, people familiar with the matter said.
During the six-week ceasefire, both sides will develop plans for a second phase that would include another 42-day cessation of hostilities and the release of more hostages. At this stage, the hostages to be released will include Israeli soldiers, a category of captives that Hamas has been reluctant to give up. To overcome this obstacle, Israel agreed to release more Palestinian prisoners for each hostage returned home.
Israel’s concessions have left U.S., Egyptian and Qatari intermediaries optimistic about a deal. But a week has passed without a clear response from Hamas, possibly in part because of difficulties communicating with Yahya Sinwar, Hamas’s military leader, who is believed to be hiding in the Gaza tunnels.
When negotiators arrived in Cairo on Friday, Israel did not send a delegation, which some of Netanyahu’s critics viewed as a snub. But Israeli and U.S. officials denied this, saying an Israeli delegation was not needed at this stage because Israel had already made its proposals and was awaiting a response from Hamas.
Hamas’s response over the weekend frustrated intermediaries because it rejected some of the language it had previously proposed and had been adopted by Israel, according to people familiar with the negotiations. The United States declared Hamas’s new position unacceptable and said that if Hamas did not really want to reach a deal, perhaps the negotiations would be over. But Hamas said it was not trying to derail the talks and would bring a new version.
That was Hamas’s counteroffer on Monday. The Israelis and Americans do not think this is acceptable but believe it leaves room for further negotiations. Technical-level talks are expected to resume in Cairo on Wednesday to discuss details. This time, Israel agreed to send a delegation to discuss Hamas’s counteroffer.
Analysts said Israel’s actions in Rafah on Monday could increase pressure on Hamas to reach a deal or derail negotiations. The attacks mainly targeted targets in the Rafah border area rather than major population areas, but it could be a sign of things to come.
Veterans in the area aren’t entirely sure whether both sides necessarily want a deal. Jon B. Altman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said Hamas may have decided it was worth “prompting Israel to take large-scale action in Rafah because it would isolate Israel” globally and deepen The United States and Israel are divided. “
At the same time, he said, Mr Netanyahu may be “seeking a trifecta” with Monday’s attack: forcing Hamas to capitulate, showing the Israeli public that he has indeed struck Rafah as promised and getting Mr Biden of trust. The government refrained from launching a full-scale attack, which Washington feared would lead to a civilian catastrophe.
“There are secrets here that I don’t know about,” Mr. Altman said. “At the same time, neither side knows the other side’s breaking point, and I fear that neither side can accurately understand the other side’s assessment.”
Khalid Elkindi, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute and a former adviser to the Palestinian leader during past peace negotiations, said he still doubts Netanyahu actually wants to reach a deal because of his own domestic politics. ceasefire agreement.
“I don’t think Rafah’s actions, including the evacuation order, are just a negotiating tactic,” he said. “Netanyahu needs Operation Rafah to stay in power and appease the fanatics in his coalition.” He added, “All in all, Netanyahu has little to gain and much to lose from the ceasefire.”
Of course, mistrust on both sides makes any agreement more difficult to reach. While the two sides appear to have reached a settlement on the first phase of a ceasefire and the release of hostages, there are some other differences between the two competing proposals, according to people familiar with the matter. But the most fundamental dispute is whether the agreement will ultimately end the war.
Negotiators have tried to finesse the issue through a time-honored diplomatic tactic of using language that is vague enough to allow both sides to interpret it as they choose. According to the agreement, both sides will use the temporary ceasefire to restore “sustainable calm.” Hamas wants “continued calm” to mean a permanent cessation of hostilities, while Israel does not want to make an explicit commitment.
U.S. officials are willing to let the definition of “sustainable calm” be a little vague, but they are banking on the idea that once the guns stop firing for six weeks, and then possibly 12 weeks, the momentum for a more lasting peace will be unstoppable. That’s why they invest so much energy in the coming days.
