Hamas' announcement that it agrees to the ceasefire terms, referred to in Israel as the "prisoner deal," caught Israel by surprise. Last night, the political-security establishment grappled with understanding the motives behind this strategic shift by the organization. On the surface, there appear to be three possibilities:
The most concerning possibility
The first and most concerning possibility is that Hamas received assurances that satisfied them that upon the deal's conclusion, the fighting would not resume, essentially turning the temporary ceasefire into a permanent one. Israel was quick to clarify that such assurances, if given, were not with its consent and would not be realized.
Video: Israeli armored forces in the Rafah border crossing area / Credit: Usage under Israeli intellectual property law, Article 27a
Lack of coordination with the US
However, there is cause for concern over the possibility that the U.S. (or another party) acted without coordinating with Israel or obtaining its approval. This could signal a growing rift between the countries – possibly stemming from Israel's intention to advance a ground operation in Rafah – and a belief in Washington that not only Hamas but also Israel is obstructing the deal, as hinted in recent American media reports following the Prime Minister's briefings last Saturday by a "senior diplomatic source."
A cynical attempt to inflame internal Israeli debate
The third possibility is that this is yet another cynical attempt by Hamas to inflame the internal Israeli debate. Once the organization announced its agreement to the ceasefire terms, the pressure shifted to the Israeli government to also agree. The families of the captives have already made clear they will intensify their struggle accordingly, likely garnering broad public support that Hamas hopes to translate into further Israeli concessions.
The proposed deal
The proposed deal that Hamas agreed to consists of three stages. The first includes the release of 33 captives (mostly women, female soldiers, elderly, and humanitarian cases) in exchange for the release of hundreds of security prisoners, the return of residents to northern Gaza, and a 42-day lull in fighting. Subsequent stages involve the release of the remaining captives, including bodies, in exchange for the release of thousands more prisoners and, as demanded by Hamas, a comprehensive cessation of hostilities – a demand Israel rejects.
While Israel rejects this demand, Hamas' agreement yesterday could present an opportunity. The organization has claimed until now that it has no information on all the captives, and now there may be a chance to develop a better understanding of who among them is alive and in what condition. This should be a fundamental condition for Israel to continue the dialogue, a show of seriousness from Hamas beyond yesterday's laconic announcement.
Moreover, Israel cannot be seen as the one obstructing the deal. This is not only due to the obligation to the captives abandoned on October 7 and for the 214 days since – it is also the potential for complications with the mediators and other countries that could jeopardize the achievements of the entire campaign and leave Israel isolated, with dramatic consequences in every sphere.
Strategic relationship with the US paramount
As important as the planned operation in Rafah is, the strategic relationship with the U.S. is more important, and Israel has no substitute for it. Anyone who believes Israel can act and prevail alone in Gaza, and also in Lebanon, is living in a fantasy. Israel needs the West (and Arab countries) by its side to be able to exist securely in the region as it has throughout its years, and as it aspires to do in the future. The Holocaust taught us to rely only on ourselves, but for that to be possible – a more complex strategy than hollow statements by leaders is required.
A reminder of this was given yesterday in the north, in Hezbollah's deadly anti-tank missile attack in Metula. The organization intensified its fire in response to the intention to operate in Rafah and will cease fighting if there is a ceasefire in the south, as it did in the previous deal in November. Israel will then have an opportunity to examine whether arrangements leading to an agreed calm – which would also lead to the return of residents to their homes – can be reached, or whether it will be required to transition to more intensive fighting against Hezbollah.
Israel's government, which is prone to bluster, has not even held a single strategic discussion on its goals in the north to date. This failure cries out to the heavens not only because of the abandonment of an entire region but because it shows that the government has no goal – just as it has no goal for the day after the war in Gaza. "Total victory" is an excellent slogan: for now, it's all talk.
