Following the UN Security Council vote to approve a three-phase ceasefire in Gaza, U.S. officials and other international allies of Israel are cynically placing blame on Hamas for a stall in current ceasefire negotiations — even as Israel has insisted on indefinitely continuing its massacre in Gaza and Hamas has said its main request is a guarantee that Israel would actually honor the ceasefire.

But reports from a wide variety of news sources on how both Israel and Hamas are approaching the ceasefire proposal suggest that Blinken is lying about which party is accepting of the deal. Indeed, reports have found that it is actually Israel that won’t agree to the deal’s framework: an immediate ceasefire with a limited prisoner and hostage exchange, then a permanent ceasefire and withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, and ultimately the reconstruction of Gaza and return of Palestinians to their homes.

Israel’s insistence on continuing its genocide has been consistent throughout the last eight months, including in reaction to the most recent ceasefire proposals of the past weeks. Officials have said Israel will only stop bombarding Gaza when they decide that Hamas has been eliminated and Palestinians there no longer pose a threat to Israel — a pledge that requires the mass slaughter of Palestinian civilians, as military procedures and Israel’s own public statements have shown.

But the main demand from Hamas appears to be straightforward, according to other officials familiar with the negotiations. Multiple outlets citing such sources have echoed what Hamas officials have said: that they are primarily concerned with getting guarantees from the U.S. and Israel that the deal will actually lead to a ceasefire and withdrawal from Gaza.

Specifically, Hamas is concerned about a lack of assurances from the current proposal about the transition between the first and second phases of the plan, Reuters reports, citing multiple sources involved with the talks. The first phase involves a six-week ceasefire, with the release of some Israeli hostages, while the second phase calls for a permanent ceasefire and Israeli troop withdrawal.

Archived version: https://archive.ph/vNwMx

  • StaySquared@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Side note:

    It’s apparent that the U.S. has invested into this war beyond just funding / weapons. In the recent massacre, there were reports from Palestinians that U.S. soldiers were presently injuring and killing people. It appears that Hamas was right all along regarding that aid dock/pier. It wasn’t for aid.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      This is propaganda designed to justify an attack on the pier. If the pier is attacked, Palestinians will starve. Hamas wants Palestinians to starve to gain more sympathy (and donation $$$) from abroad.

      I mean come on, do you think the IDF lacks special forces capabilities to the degree they’d need to bring in US special forces to help them? And even if they did, why would the US launch a special forces operation from a pier instead of simply flying a helicopter from an aircraft carrier? Or just tagging along with the IDF from an Israeli base? Why would they ever use the pier for this purpose?

      Hamas is spreading obvious propaganda which falls apart with even two seconds of critical thinking. This is the kind of shit that could result in Palestinians starving, if you care at all about the people there, don’t spread obvious lies.

      • StaySquared@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Wat. If Hamas wanted Palestinians to starve… then why is it the Israelis that were stopping aid trucks and destroying the aid packages? Why wasn’t Hamas destroying the aid trucks?

        For one, Israel is the leading global recipient of Title 22 U.S. security assistance under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program.

        There’s multiple reports stating that the naval pier constructed by US forces on Gaza’s shore was used in the attack on the Nuseirat, with ground forces launching from this pier. And witnesses reporting that U.S. soldiers breeching homes/buildings during the attack.

        You claim that Hamas spreads “obvious” propaganda, yet it is Israel who has pushed the most atrocious propaganda and all of it was a lie, all of it. And the U.S. government is just as complicit, especially for trying to take down TikTok, trying to push the anti-semitism bill/law in the U.S., violating our first amendment right, outlawing BDS in some of the states in the U.S., again violating our first amendment right (that’s three acts of treason against the U.S. Constitution) and each congressman/woman, at least on the republican side, having AIPAC handlers. Each one apparently has an assigned Israeli whispering into the ears of our representatives.

        Btw, seems like Netanyahu was right, Americans are easy to control.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKRFGS_Woww

        • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          You’re trying to distract from the facts at hand. US installs a pier to bring in aid. Hamas spreads obvious propaganda about the pier being for special forces operations. Which is completely insane (special forces don’t need a pier!) but people are buying it.

          Why would Hamas spread this propaganda? Probably just generic “US bad” kind of thing. But we can’t dismiss the possibility they want images of people starving for propaganda purposes.

          I mean if you’re buying the propaganda that the pier isn’t for humanitarian purposes then they can attack the pier and get images of people starving and you will blame the US and Israel for those images and won’t consider that Hamas might be to blame for it.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    From what I am understanding a few points Hamas wants changed:

    The US ceasefire proposal says israel only needs to leave the populated areas of Gaza. Meaning Blinken is saying that he wants to let israel occupy the “non populated areas” of Gaza

    Hamas wants israel out of Gaza.

    Israel wants to continue their Genocide if a deal has not been reached after 6 weeks.

    Hamas wants a permanent ceasefire and the ceasefire should continue indefinitely after 6 weeks if there’s still discussions ongoing.

    For the rebuilding of Gaza the US would contribute ~400 million dollars to rebuilding Gaza (damage estimates 30-40 Billion from UN) after giving israel 26 Billion in weapons. Did not read a comment about this from Hamas but this seems rather low.

    • Iceblade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Would still be better to agree to a temporary ceasefire whilst a permanent one is negotiated.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        If there was any chance of it turning into a permanent ceasefire; yes. However israel has made it clear in no uncertain words that they will continue the Genocide after 6 weeks.

        Netanyahu says the war will not end until Hamas is destroyed

        Biden said Friday a peace deal would involve an initial six-week cease-fire with a partial Israeli military withdrawal, and the release of some hostages, while “a permanent end to hostilities” is negotiated through mediators.

        Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office on Saturday dismissed any idea that Israel would agree to a permanent cease-fire before “the destruction of Hamas’ military and governing capabilities,” saying such a proposal is “a non-starter.”

        • Iceblade@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Netanyahu is not the end-all-be-all of Israeli decisionmaking. Unlike Hamas, the Israeli state is a democratic institution. If an agreement is formulated between that guarantees the Israeli citizenry that Gazan islamic terrorists won’t repeat an october 7 massacre in the future, Netanyahu will not be able to stop it. Time is what is needed to create such an agreement.

          However, as always, Hamas prioritizes their own interests above those of the Gazan populace. They know very well Israel can not realistucally agree to an unconditional, permanent end to hostilities, as that was the situation that led to october 7th in the first place.

          At the minimum I would expect a permanent end to the war to be conditioned on Hamas releasing the remaining civilian hostages.

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            An Apartheid is not a democracy. But still the war cabinet fully supports what Netanyahu is saying here.

            So you are correct to point out that it is not just Netanyahu but the israeli government that does not want a ceasefire.

            The rest of your comment makes no sense. Consider reading my previous comment again.

            • Iceblade@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              An Apartheid is not a democracy.

              Even if it were, those aren’t mutually exclusive. Most, if not all democracies are flawed in some fashion.

              But still the war cabinet fully supports what Netanyahu is saying here.

              So much so that members have been on the verge of resigning several times. You underestimate just how frail Netanyahus position really is.

              So you are correct to point out that it is not just Netanyahu but the israeli government that does not want a ceasefire.

              It does, just not at the terms Hamas demands.

              The rest of your comment makes no sense.

              I’m perfectly willing to clarify. If there is something you fail to understand, please highlight it.

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                No they are mutually exclusive. Annexing the West Bank without giving its inhabitants the right to vote means israel is not a democracy.

                One cannot be a Democracy and an Apartheid at the same time.

                I cannot respond to the rest of your comment as you appear to be describing an alternate reality which we are not present in.