Staff Reports
The ongoing saga of the ceasefire deal between Hamas and Israel has dampened spirits at a time when one would expect festive cheer. With Donald Trump poised to reclaim the presidency, his supporters are understandably uneasy, especially in light of the apparent concessions Israel has made. Observers are left scratching their heads, wondering how the staunch advocate of Israel could foster a deal that many perceive as a retreat rather than a triumph. Rumors abound that secret terms lurk beneath the surface of this agreement or that an unexpected twist is imminent. However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent remarks hint that the whole deal may soon unravel anyway.
The ceasefire was scheduled to start on Sunday morning, yet Netanyahu has stated that progress hinges on receiving a roster of hostages whose release was part of the agreement. Israel, he emphasized, will not budge on violations and asserted that Hamas holds the sole responsibility for any missteps. Naturally, this is a juxtaposition that is hardly surprising; Hamas escalated the conflict by launching an unforgivable attack that took the lives of 1,200 Israelis on October 7, 2023, which leaves many wondering how anyone could expect them to honor a ceasefire now.
You'll Never Believe This, But It Looks as if Hamas is Sabotaging the Ceasefire Deal –
https://t.co/txn2eoeqaH pic.twitter.com/RxENAT5uk8— Robert Spencer (@jihadwatchRS) January 19, 2025
One must ponder whether Hamas is attempting to undermine this supposed peace effort. Observers have rightly noted that their past behavior suggests a pattern of defaulting on agreements, so why would this instance bear different fruit? A column in the Times of Israel laid out an array of failures attributed to Israel during this conflict, among them a disastrous public relations campaign that allegedly turned global sentiments sour. Furthermore, this deal threatens to free countless Palestinian prisoners, including those serving life sentences for heinous acts against Israelis, potentially giving them a second chance at violence.
The terms of this ceasefire raise eyebrows, as it appears that Israel has made significant sacrifices in exchange for minimal returns. Despite the devastation wrought upon Gaza, international funds will soon pour in to aid reconstruction. Unfortunately, some of that financial windfall is expected to bolster Hamas rather than aid the rebuilding of legitimate civic infrastructure. Even after a grueling conflict, Hamas remains firmly in control of Gaza, and the same dysfunctional United Nations aid programs will continue as if the conflict never existed.
Historically, similar agreements have faltered because the entities involved—specifically, Hamas—hold an uncompromising mindset. The historical precedent is glaring with figures such as Yasir Arafat, who walked away from extraordinary offers for peace, refusing to come to the table without the still-contentious “right of return” for Palestinians. This was mirrored when Mahmoud Abbas turned down an even more generous proposal offered in 2008. History reveals an unyielding jihadist doctrine, which contends that no semblance of Israel can be permitted to endure.
The intransigence of Hamas echoes the past in its refusal to accept any framework that falls short of total annihilation of the Jewish state. While they might initially agree to certain terms, reality dictates that they are likely to breach any agreement, whether by withholding lists of hostages or resorting to other duplicitous tactics. After all, the core tenet of jihad demands an unrelenting pursuit of the ultimate objective: the destruction of Israel. The joke may be on the negotiators once again, as the cycle of violence and broken agreements prepares to resume.
