-Analysis-
PARIS — The head of Israel’s Mossad, the head of the CIA, their Egyptian counterpart, and the Prime Minister of Qatar: a notable quartet had gathered this past weekend in Paris. The outcome of their negotiations is now being studied by both parties to the conflict, Israel and Hamas.
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
What’s at stake? A truce that would last several weeks, the release of some of the 132 hostages still held by Hamas, and the release of some of the thousands of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. Since the end of November’s truce, the fighting has continued unabated and the death toll has kept rising: and as such, the humanitarian crisis, and the fate of the hostages, are weighing heavily on Israeli society.
But an agreement has yet to be reached. Antony Blinken, the US Secretary of State, is expected in Israel on Saturday, for his fifth visit since October 7; his arrival indicates that the United States intends to push for an agreement if only to curb the worrying regional escalation.
Each side has its internal contradictions, making compromise tricky. Impossible?
On the Israeli side, the debate is public – too public, no doubt. The far right refuses to make any concessions and threatens to blow up the ruling coalition. It is feeling a surge of confidence after an astounding rally in Jerusalem, with messianic overtones, in favor of the recolonization of Gaza. A third of the government participated, including members of Benyamin Netanyahu‘s party.
Hounded by Israel
The Israeli Prime Minister hardened his tone Wednesday, probably under the influence of this strong extremist current: he opposed the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners and vowed not to withdraw his troops from Gaza, as Hamas demands, until he has achieved his objectives, which are precisely the eradication of Hamas. Blinken will have to be persuasive.
Hamas also has difficulties, between the external branch and the internal leaders who have been hounded by Israel for nearly four months. The decision is not easy.
A truce does not mean the end of the war. Even if the Americans, like others, will try to use the cessation of fighting to initiate a political process.
A signal from Tehran?
The precedent set in November showed that a 10-day truce did not prevent the resumption of a logic of war that had not abated. Will the same be true this time, if an agreement is reached? The humanitarian toll and regional escalation argue in favor of a shift to a political logic, but this logic is not yet clear.
The first sign of deescalation came Tuesday night when the Iraqi Shia militia behind the drone attack that killed three American soldiers announced that it would stop attacking the United States.
Is it just fear of reprisals? A desire to preserve Iraq? Or a signal from Tehran? In any case, it’s unexpected — and positive.
The next few days will be decisive: if the small window of opportunity closes, a new cycle of despair will be imposed on Gazan civilians and Israeli hostages. On that account, no one will want to be held responsible.
