After more than 10 days since receiving the “Paris Meeting Proposal”, the Islamic Resistance Movement, Hamas, submitted its response on the proposed framework for ceasing aggression and exchanging prisoners to mediators in Qatar and Egypt.
Hamas’ response received various initial reactions, starting with Qatari Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, who stated that Hamas’s response “includes remarks, but overall it is positive.”
From Cairo, an Egyptian official reported that the response received by the General Intelligence Ministry in Cairo reflects the positive spirit on the Palestinian side.
In Washington, U.S. President Joe Biden’s response was that Hamas’s response was “excessive,” while the Israeli side merely announced the receipt of Hamas’s response. The Mossad commented that Hamas’s response was received by the Qatari mediator, and its details are being thoroughly reviewed by all parties participating in the negotiations.
Response Details
Al Jazeera reported that it obtained details of Hamas’s response to the proposed ceasefire agreement framework in Gaza presented to mediators yesterday.
Sources informed Al Jazeera that the movement agreed to a ceasefire agreement framework in three stages, each lasting 45 days, including agreeing to exchange prisoners and the bodies of the deceased, ending the blockade, and initiating reconstruction.
Hamas demanded that full ceasefire talks conclude before commencing the second phase, ensuring the Israeli forces exit the Gaza Strip’s boundaries and initiating the reconstruction process.
Implications and Significance
The first implication highlighted in Hamas’s response concerns the timeframe the movement took to mature its response, indicating that Hamas did not make its decision under field or political pressures but engaged in internal and detailed dialogues with resistance factions, addressing all issues outlined in the framework document.
The second implication lies in Hamas’s ability to deal with the political interactions related to the Israeli aggression on Gaza and affirm its presence as a political entity leading negotiations from the Palestinian side, a stark contrast to the regional environment during the 2014 summer war, where Azam al-Ahmad, representing the Palestine Liberation Organization, led the Palestinian negotiating delegation.
Simultaneously, Hamas’s response to regional and international initiatives aiming to cease Israeli aggression on Gaza is defined by the movement, per its response, as a central aim of achieving a “comprehensive ceasefire.”
In its response, Hamas expressed this by halting military operations between the parties, striving for complete and sustainable calm.
The movement had stated its position since the conclusion of the recent phase of the exchange deal overseen by Doha and Cairo, leading to the release of foreign detainees, as well as Israeli women and children, in exchange for temporary truces and the release of Palestinian women and children from occupation prisons.
Priority and Conclusion
Hamas’s response indicates that this demand remains a top priority and there is no change in its stance. In its response, the movement detailed its understanding of the ceasefire demand as the withdrawal of the Israeli army, cessation of military operations, and an end to all aerial activities.
Hamas’s response also demonstrates the inclusion of annexes ensuring the completion of vital tracks deemed essential for accepting the commencement of a qualitative exchange deal.
The movement aimed to reflect any step in the ceasefire negotiations’ path regarding Palestinians in Gaza, who Israel has placed in extremely challenging conditions.
Regarding the prisoner exchange, Hamas emphasized in its response ensuring the initial release of a select number of Palestinian prisoners, including women, children, and the elderly (above 50 years old), and the ill, unconditionally detained by the date of the agreement’s signing in addition to 1500 Palestinian prisoners. The movement labeled 500 of them as life-sentenced or high-conviction prisoners.
This inclusion aligns with Hamas’s “Aqsa Flood” goals, launched in October 2023, emphasizing the importance of the Palestinian cause and intensifying a widely agreed-upon national and Islamic issue.
Hamas indicated it ensured its response was comprehensive, covering all discussed issues by the parties, including those related to Palestinians and their rights, offering a detailed response challenging the generalization attempted by the Paris Meeting document.
By providing a “detailed” response, Hamas offered a clear interpretation at times that could be seen as explanatory of the framework document, presenting it from a different perspective.
Influence of Hamas’s Response on Netanyahu’s Position
It is evident that Hamas recognizes the complexities surrounding Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, caught between his refusal to cease-fire to avoid facing investigation commissions and corruption courts and the demands of his allies from the nationalist religious and religious Zionist streams led by Itamar Ben Gvir and Betzalel Smotrich, imposing their “blackmail” program on Netanyahu.
Conversely, members of the War Council who joined the government since October 7, led by Benny Gantz and Gideon Sa’ar, are encircling Netanyahu with repeated demands to provide answers on significant questions related to the war.
These demands involve pushing for a high-priced prisoner exchange deal and deciding who will control Gaza post-war, formulating a vision for the future Palestinian Authority, resolving the northern front, and the return of northern and southern residents to their homes.
Amidst the government and War Council environment, opposition leader Yair Lapid is exerting pressure in various ways on Netanyahu through offers to join the government and secure everything needed for a prisoner exchange deal, with attention turning to escalating protests by detainee families demanding their release.
Calls to Reduce Escalation
Although the American stance expressed by administration officials rejects a ceasefire and proposes a long truce instead, the Biden administration aims to mediate for de-escalation and calm in the region, preparing for the most crucial elections in its history by year-end.
American concerns heighten as Ramadan approaches, typically witnessing Israeli escalations in Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa Mosque, sparking Palestinian reactions that may differ in form and scale this year amidst the massacres and atrocities committed by Israel in Gaza.
Hamas positioned its response within this intricate and sensitive environment surrounding Netanyahu, understanding that the details of its response represent solitary bolts exploding and a field of mines increasing the difficulty of Netanyahu’s position.
In his press conference yesterday, Netanyahu appeared stuck in his position, reiterating the necessity of eliminating Hamas above all. This stance is now subject to extensive skepticism after 4 months of the assault on Gaza, as the Israeli Prime Minister seeks a way out of his crisis—either surrendering to his extremist allies, corruption courts, or Hamas’s conditions.
