The framework for a deal that could lead to a ceasefire and the release of hostages held in Gaza is being put to the Hamas leadership, Qatar’s prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, said on Monday.
Speaking after talks in Paris between officials from the US, Qatar, Egypt and Israel, he said: “We are in a better place than we were a few weeks ago.”
The basis of the deal is a 45-day pause in the fighting leading to the release of 35 Israeli hostages and as many as 4,000 Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails.
But Israel remains opposed to a permanent ceasefire and wants to retain a right to recommence hostilities against Hamas – something that the Hamas leadership wants ruled out.
Holy shit 4000 prisoners for 35 hostages and Hamas still says no. Pretty clear they’re not negotiating in good faith.
During the last ceasefire, Israel took more hostages than they released. I can understand why Hamas might be skeptical about new deals without a long-term ceasefire guarantee.
Refusing to negotiate is not “bad faith negotiation.” “the release of those prisoners is not necessary for our overall strategic objective of securing our homeland against invaders, and a ceasefire would be positively counterproductive to that strategy” is more likely.
In what universe would a ceasefire be counterproductive to Hamas? They’re getting wrecked on a daily basis.
I don’t think they have 35 “returnable” hostages at this point.
Could be that too. It could be counterproductive if they perceive their struggle as existential. If they believe they will be killed whether they fight or no, they will fight for having nothing to lose. Does that explain why I think they might not be interested in ceasefire?
Ok but if they have no interest in a ceasefire or hostage exchange, then they are by definition negotiating in bad faith…
To be clear: I do not speak for hamas and can only speculate as to their motivations. My understanding was that they rejected the opportunity to negotiate, not that they went to negotiations without the intent to actually bargain.
That’s a fair point. I don’t know to what extent they were involved in negotiations. I think it was significant as we’ve had several days of news about “constructive” negotiations, but I can’t prove that.
It’s sure hard to tell what the fuck is going on over there, isn’t it? Perhaps we’ve moved on from the information age to the “artificial information” age.
Important to remember that there are no good guys in this mess, only bastards and bystanders
You including the hostages in that?
They’re the bystanders
They look more like victims to me, being taken hostage for 4 months and all. But you do you
Bystander just means they don’t subscribe to either side. You can both be a bystander and victim…
Bystander, noun: “a person who is present at an event or incident but does not take part.”
They were bystanders until they were taken hostage. Now they’re being forced to take part involuntarily, which makes them victims.
Super weird point to fight on. Obviously there are victims in every war.
