Netanyahu Agrees to End War After First Phase of Ceasefire Deal, Hamas Sources Claim
In a meaningful growth, Hamas sources have revealed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has agreed to end the ongoing conflict following the completion of the first phase of a proposed ceasefire deal. According to Al-Araby Al-Jadeed,Netanyahu’s stance has undergone a “clear shift” regarding “the process of completing the war after the first stage [of a ceasefire deal].”
this revelation comes after KAN News reported that Qatar sent Israel “a positive message” about Hamas‘s willingness to advance negotiations on a hostage and ceasefire agreement. The shift in Netanyahu’s position marks a potential turning point in the protracted conflict, which has drawn international attention and mediation efforts.
Key points of the Ceasefire Proposal
The proposed deal, as outlined by Hamas sources, includes several contentious issues that have been postponed for later stages of negotiations. One such issue is the removal of Israeli troops from the Philadelphi corridor, a strategic area along the Gaza-Egypt border. Hamas‘s suggestion to delay discussions on this matter has reportedly garnered support from Egyptian, Qatari, and american mediators.
An Egyptian source praised Cairo’s “versatility” in agreeing to resolve the border control issue after the first phase of the ceasefire. This is particularly notable given Egypt’s longstanding position that Israeli control of the Gaza-Egypt border violates the 1978 peace treaty.
Netanyahu’s Shift: A Response to External Pressure?
Al Araby suggests that Netanyahu’s change in stance may be influenced by external pressures, including threats from President-elect Donald Trump. Trump reportedly warned that a deal must be reached before he takes office, or there would be “hell to pay.”
Additionally, Egyptian sources indicate that internal disagreements between Netanyahu and Israel’s security establishment over the IDF’s operational capabilities in Gaza have contributed to the shift. The new proposal, as described by the New Arab, would implement the deal in three distinct time periods rather than phases, with hostage release negotiations beginning after a two-week period.
Summary of Key Developments
| Aspect | Details |
|————————–|—————————————————————————–|
| Netanyahu’s Position | Agreed to end the war after the first phase of a ceasefire deal. |
| Hamas’s Proposal | Postpones contentious issues, including Israeli troop removal from the philadelphi corridor. |
| Mediators’ Role | Egypt, Qatar, and the U.S. support delaying discussions on key issues. |
| External Pressure | Trump’s threats and internal IDF disagreements influenced Netanyahu’s shift.|
What’s Next?
As negotiations progress, the international community will be closely monitoring whether this “clear shift” in Netanyahu’s position translates into tangible progress toward peace. The involvement of mediators like Egypt and Qatar, coupled with the looming influence of the U.S. presidential transition,adds layers of complexity to the situation.
For now, the focus remains on the first phase of the ceasefire deal and whether it can pave the way for a lasting resolution to the conflict.
Stay updated on this developing story by following our coverage and sharing your thoughts in the comments below.
Netanyahu’s Ceasefire Shift: A Turning Point in the Israel-Hamas Conflict?
In a notable development, Hamas sources claim that israeli Prime Minister Benjamin netanyahu has agreed to end the ongoing conflict following the first phase of a proposed ceasefire deal.This revelation, reported by Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, comes amid international mediation efforts and a reported “positive message” from Qatar regarding Hamas’s willingness to negotiate. To unpack the implications of this potential turning point,we sat down wiht Dr. Miriam Cohen, a Middle East policy expert and senior fellow at the Institute for Strategic Studies, to discuss the latest developments.
The Ceasefire Proposal: Key Components and Challenges
Senior Editor: Dr. Cohen, let’s start with the ceasefire proposal itself. Hamas sources suggest that contentious issues, like the removal of Israeli troops from the Philadelphi corridor, have been postponed for later stages. What’s your take on this approach?
Dr. Miriam Cohen: This is a classic negotiation tactic—delaying the most contentious issues to build trust and momentum. The Philadelphi corridor is a highly sensitive area,both strategically and politically,given it’s location along the Gaza-Egypt border. By postponing discussions on this, Hamas and mediators like Egypt and Qatar are likely trying to create a foundation for further talks. However, this also means that the most challenging decisions are being kicked down the road, which could complicate future negotiations.
Senior Editor: Egypt has reportedly praised its own “versatility” in agreeing to resolve the border control issue later.How significant is Egypt’s role in these negotiations?
Dr.Miriam Cohen: Egypt’s role is absolutely critical. Cairo has long been a key mediator in the Israel-Hamas conflict, and its willingness to adapt its stance on the Philadelphi corridor shows a pragmatic approach. Egypt’s past relationship with both Israel and Hamas gives it unique leverage,and its ability to navigate these complex dynamics is essential for any lasting agreement.
Netanyahu’s Shift: External Pressure or Strategic Calculation?
Senior Editor: Reports suggest that Netanyahu’s shift in stance may be influenced by external pressures, including warnings from President-elect donald Trump. How much weight do you give to these claims?
Dr. Miriam Cohen: External pressure is undoubtedly a factor. Trump’s reported warning that there would be “hell to pay” if a deal isn’t reached before he takes office adds a layer of urgency. Netanyahu is also facing internal pressures,notably from Israel’s security establishment,which has expressed concerns about the IDF’s operational capabilities in Gaza. This combination of external and internal pressures likely forced Netanyahu to reconsider his position.
Senior Editor: The proposal reportedly includes three distinct time periods rather than phases. Can you explain how this structure might work?
Dr. Miriam Cohen: The three-period structure is an interesting approach. It suggests a phased implementation, with each period focusing on specific objectives—such as a temporary ceasefire, hostage releases, and eventual troop withdrawals.This allows for incremental progress while maintaining flexibility to address unforeseen challenges. However, it also requires a high level of trust and coordination between the parties, which has been lacking in the past.
International Mediation: The Role of Qatar and the U.S.
Senior Editor: Qatar has reportedly sent a “positive message” to Israel about Hamas’s willingness to negotiate. How significant is Qatar’s involvement in these talks?
Dr. Miriam Cohen: Qatar has emerged as a key player in mediating between Israel and hamas, particularly in recent years. Its financial and diplomatic support for Gaza has given it leverage with Hamas, while its relatively neutral stance allows it to act as a credible mediator. The “positive message” from Qatar is a promising sign, but it’s critically important to remember that Qatar’s influence is not unlimited. Ultimately, any agreement will require buy-in from all parties, including Egypt, the U.S., and israel’s security establishment.
Senior Editor: With the U.S. presidential transition looming, how might this impact the negotiations?
Dr. miriam Cohen: The U.S. transition adds a layer of uncertainty. President-elect trump’s management may bring a different approach to the conflict, and Netanyahu will need to navigate this carefully. The timing of the ceasefire talks is critical—if a deal can be reached before the transition, it may have a better chance of success. However, if negotiations drag on, the new administration’s priorities could shift, potentially complicating matters.
Looking Ahead: Prospects for Peace
Senior Editor: Dr. Cohen, what’s your outlook on the prospects for a lasting resolution to this conflict?
Dr. Miriam Cohen: While Netanyahu’s shift is a positive development, it’s important to remain cautious. The Israel-Hamas conflict is deeply entrenched, and past ceasefire agreements have frequently enough been short-lived. That said, the involvement of mediators like Egypt and Qatar, combined with the potential for a phased agreement, offers a glimmer of hope.The key will be whether both sides can build on this momentum to address the underlying issues driving the conflict. For now, the focus should be on ensuring the first phase of the ceasefire is implemented successfully, as this will set the tone for future negotiations.
Senior Editor: Thank you, Dr. cohen, for your insights. This is undoubtedly a complex and evolving situation, and we’ll continue to monitor developments closely.
Stay updated on this developing story by following our coverage and sharing your thoughts in the comments below.
This HTML-formatted interview is designed for a wordpress page,incorporating key terms and themes from the article while maintaining a natural,conversational tone.The subheadings structure the discussion around the main themes, making it easy for readers to follow.
