The families of the prisoners accuse Netanyahu of waging a second war against them
The families of Israeli prisoners held by Hamas expressed deep concern over the actions of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, accusing him of neglecting them, putting them at the bottom of the ladder of attention, and sacrificing them on “the altar of his personal battle.” They saw the policy he was pursuing with them as “a war aimed at splitting their ranks, silencing them, and putting them in a corner.” They watch the prisoners die in secret, helpless.”
This came after Netanyahu’s decision not to send an Israeli representative to Cairo to continue the talks, contrary to the request of Mossad chief David Barnea and Shin Bet head Ronen Bar, and his office said that “as long as there is no answer that (Hamas) will give up its delusional demands, it must “Wait.”
The families of the prisoners considered the lack of Israeli participation and talk of waiting “irresponsible behavior based on arrogance and arrogance” and did not show the slightest level of sympathy for their tragedy and the suffering of them and their captive children. They said that they felt intense anger, frustration, and despair at the state and its leaders, and they decided to escalate their struggle against this policy. They decided to participate in the protest demonstrations launched by the leaders of the popular protest in front of the homes of ministers and representatives.
A sit-in tent for the families of Israeli prisoners held by Hamas in front of the Knesset headquarters (archive)
Absence from negotiations
It is noteworthy that, unlike the previous kidnapped deal, Netanyahu almost alone leads the steps regarding the deal and does not include his companions in the War Command Council, Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot. An official in Netanyahu’s office tried to mitigate the impact of his decision to be absent from the negotiations, and said that discussions in Cairo on a possible agreement to liberate the kidnapped persons will continue in the next two days, with Israel being informed of its developments. He stressed that the political and security cabinet in the government will receive a review of the status of indirect talks with Hamas on the deal to liberate the kidnapped people.
According to a request submitted by many ministers from the Likud Party, the decisive discussion about the deal will be in the “expanded cabinet” and not in the “narrow cabinet,” unlike the previous deal in which the decision was made in the narrow cabinet. Many ministers had criticized in a previous session the framework proposal for the deal, as decided in the previous stages. They expressed their opposition to dividing the deal into stages that do not include all the kidnapped persons.
The Israeli sources rejected talk of optimistic progress as suggested by the mediators, and said that “the talks held in Cairo witnessed (slight progress),” “after (Hamas) backed down from the demand that Israel stop the war completely as a condition for liberating the kidnapped.” However, there are still huge gaps between Israel and Hamas on the central issues related to the number of Palestinian prisoners who will be released from Israeli prisons.
Netanyahu’s meeting with the families of Israeli prisoners held by Hamas last October (dpa)
Time frames
On the other hand, sources familiar with the Cairo talks revealed that Israel provided the mediators with its answer to the Hamas movement’s response to the Paris proposal, including the time frames for the three stages of the proposed deal. The sources reported that the time frame set by Israel to implement the first phase of the agreement may reach 42 days (6 weeks) on the basis of 35 days + 7 days. In addition to a second phase of up to 30 days, while no time frame has been set for the third phase.
The sources stated that Israel refused to withdraw from places in Gaza where there are no residents. In the Israeli response, the word “inhabited” was replaced by the word “densely populated,” with regard to the areas from which the occupation army will withdraw, noting that “Hamas” demanded in its response “the repositioning of forces far outside the populated areas in the entire Gaza Strip.”
The Israeli response stipulated the “rehabilitation” of hospitals instead of their “reconstruction.” The response also included the introduction of 500 trucks of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip, and the introduction of mobile homes (caravans – containers) and tents, in coordination with the Israeli side. Regarding Hamas’s request to “lift any Israeli restrictions on the movement of passengers, the sick, and the wounded through the Rafah crossing,” Israel agreed to allow the departure of up to 50 wounded per day, provided that they are not less than 50 years old.
Two fighters from the Al-Qassam Brigades accompanied by two prisoners during the prisoner exchange between Hamas and Israel last November (AFP)
A story of world war
Regarding the prisoner exchange, Israel insists, as Netanyahu had previously stated, that 3 Palestinian prisoners be released for every Israeli prisoner, with the addition of female conscripts in exchange for some prisoners with high sentences. Officials from the Israeli right had attacked the United States because of the pressure it was exerting to pass the deal.
According to Hillel Fresh, one of the ideological authorities for the government coalition parties, Washington is asking Israel to do things that it was not prepared to do on its own. He gave an example of this from World War II, saying: “At the height of its occupation in 1943, Japanese forces detained about 27,000 American soldiers and about 14,000 kidnapped civilians. Relative to the population of the United States at that time, which amounted to 125 million people, this number is much larger than the number of hostages held by Hamas today. The 41,000 American prisoners and hostages constituted, in Israeli terms today, about 2,925 hostages held by Hamas. ).
The Japanese attitude towards the captured soldiers in particular was no less barbaric and violent than the position of Hamas towards our kidnappers. In light of the large numbers of American prisoners of war, the harsh conditions in which they were held, and the clear and immediate danger to their lives, the question that arises is: What did the United States do to release them? It turns out it didn’t do much. During the entire three years of captivity, only two prisoner exchanges took place, one in mid-1942 and again a year later. The total number of those released was just over 3,000, or less than 8 percent of the total 41,000 prisoners.
Fish concluded that “the prisoner-of-war policy pursued by the United States during World War II must serve as an example to the general public and Israeli leaders in our major existential war against Hamas.” After all, in relative terms, the scale of the October 7 massacre was infinitely greater than the attack on Pearl Harbor. The Axis powers were unable to invade the United States even for a day, while Hamas was able to penetrate 25 kilometers into Israeli territory.
#Israels #claims #spotted #tunnels.. #Yahya #AlSinwars #family
2024-02-16 04:08:13
