Hamas' military wing made clear early this week that fighter surrender or weapons abandonment remain off the table. Mohammad Nazzal, a senior Hamas official abroad, rejected exile outside Gaza and urged mediators to intervene.

Turkey wasted no time seizing this as another diplomatic opportunity, with sources saying it is "working to ensure safe passage for approximately 200 'Gazan civilians' trapped in Rafah tunnels" – as if 200 civilians simply got stuck in underground passages.

The deteriorating relationship between Ankara and Jerusalem, sparked by Turkish arrest warrants and Israel's response, combined with Israeli opposition to Turkish participation in Gaza's multinational force, will feature in Jared Kushner's discussions with Netanyahu, though not as the central focus.

Washington's primary objective is stabilizing the ceasefire. Meeting this goal requires advancing to stage two of the Trump plan and generating implementation momentum. With everyone occupied by processes and mechanisms, reality on the ground will shift toward non-combat, enabling Trump to pursue his broader diplomatic ambitions.

From Israel's perspective, however, the ceasefire is not the end goal. Particularly not now, after recovering living hostages and most deceased remains. Eliminating enemy capabilities and removing weapons from the territory remain Israel's core objectives, which cannot be sacrificed to ceasefire demands or satisfied through cosmetic arrangements.

Furthermore, Israel's approach in Gaza will directly impact Hezbollah arrangements (and the reverse), leaving no room for creative half-measures that sound good but deliver nothing.

Even without this consideration, regional discourse is already showing such formulas emerging. Examples include attempts to limit disarmament definitions to offensive weapons only – excluding tunnels, personal arms, and other capabilities from discussion. Another involves establishing an "administrative committee" for civilian Gaza governance, supposedly without Hamas participation, when the terror group already influences personnel selection and will clearly control such governance as the Strip's dominant force.

Returning to the besieged in Rafah – their number remains unclear. Media reports citing Israeli sources estimate 150 to 200. Foreign press mentioned lower figures, while Hamas websites simply stated the military wing withholds information due to sensitivity, describing them as "Qassam elite" facing high risk "while contending with medical supply shortages, electricity deficits, and the need to secure tunnels after extensive war damage."

Hamas spokesmen have raised no claims about broken commitments on this matter. They frame the connection to recovering IDF soldier Hadar Goldin's remains through humanitarian considerations and stability interests.

Given these circumstances, Israel possesses every advantage to transform this incident into a powerful symbol of its Hamas dismantlement commitment. Time favors us here, and provided our forces can block attacks from the besieged or other directions, no rush exists. Regardless, this event's conclusion must be decisive – mass surrender, detention or terrorist deaths. Images and publicity carry value. This is how regimes fall. Exile, as some mediators suggest, while not inherently rejected, should only acceptable as a post-surrender, post-arrest step, never as a replacement.

A Al-Resalah Hamas website editorial characterized the besieged issue as testing Hamas' capacity for post-war challenges. "It combines military, diplomatic, and humanitarian aspects and conveys an important message to the Palestinian public and the world regarding Hamas's ability to protect its people and manage humanitarian crises, in an extremely complex environment and under international supervision." This equally tests Israeli determination, providing further reason Israel cannot accept any solution Hamas would claim as an achievement.

The post Israel's Rafah test could show path to toppling Hamas appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

These terrorists became trapped in tunnels in the two southern cities. They are surrounded but attempt periodically to attack IDF soldiers. Since the ceasefire started, they have succeeded in killing three soldiers and wounding others. The IDF has eliminated many attackers, but many others remain in the tunnels. At the beginning of contacts, Hamas demanded passage in its own vehicles that would enter IDF territory and be escorted by the Red Cross to prevent harm. Subsequently, it agreed they would be transferred in Red Cross vehicles but demanded they keep their weapons.

Israel Hayom revealed Israel demanded the terrorists leave their weapons behind. Additional conditions that were set included Hamas committing to halt the attacks and maintain the ceasefire. Most critically, Hamas would return all bodies of the kidnapped fallen soldiers, again as written in the Sharm agreement.

According to information Israel has, Hamas has access to nearly or all the bodies and is withholding their return to gain advantages in negotiations. Israel also demanded an update on progress implementing the second phase, which includes Hamas disarming. During the contacts, Israel has conveyed a clarification to Hamas that if the attacks don't cease, all these terrorists will be eliminated and buried beneath the tunnel rubble.

However, Hamas has refused the condition of leaving weapons behind, claimed it has no control or contact with the terrorists in question, and regarding the kidnapped fallen soldiers, continues to assert that extracting the bodies requires engineering tools it doesn't possess. This response, combined with public pressure in Israel, led to the prime minister's announcement at midday that he will not permit safe passage of 200 Hamas terrorists and continues his firm position of disarming Hamas and demilitarizing the Strip, while thwarting terror threats against our forces.

The significance is that the IDF is expected to intensify its operations in areas under its control against those terrorists, exposing hiding places and eliminating them. On the diplomatic level, the Americans are trying to delay such intense operations to prevent collapse of the ceasefire. Another consideration in the delay is continued searches for fallen kidnapped soldiers in various locations in the Strip.

The post Hamas seeks to keep weapons – Israel sends warning appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

This message has echoed through Netanyahu's recent engagements across Israel's security establishment, from IDF general staff headquarters to the Shin Bet, from the Police College to Fire and Rescue headquarters, and in meetings with Magen David Adom personnel. The prime minister is systematically preparing for what could prove his most consequential diplomatic mission since returning to office.

Netanyahu's upcoming Washington visit – his fourth since reclaiming the premiership – represents a dramatic departure from typical diplomatic expectations. Rather than tempering hopes or managing expectations downward, Netanyahu is deliberately elevating the stakes. "Exploiting success is no less important than achieving success," he emphasized this week, a philosophy that will guide his approach to these critical talks.

President Donald Trump awaits Netanyahu as a leader basking in the glow of strategic triumph. Trump's decision to authorize direct US participation in devastating strikes against Iran's nuclear infrastructure not only demonstrated unprecedented bilateral cooperation but also fulfilled his campaign promise to avoid prolonged regional conflicts. The American president successfully navigated between decisive action and escalation prevention – exactly the balance his critics said was impossible.

This diplomatic momentum propels Trump toward his broader Middle East objectives established before inauguration – comprehensive war termination and accelerated peace agreements. The convergence of military success and political opportunity creates a unique window for transformative regional arrangements.

The atmosphere surrounding next week's meetings combines urgency with opportunity, pressure with potential. Time constraints intensify as regional dynamics shift rapidly, while multiple strategic openings demand immediate attention. The agenda will encompass both tactical decisions and strategic declarations, celebrating shared victory while charting future cooperation.

American involvement in Iran operations has fundamentally transformed US-Israel relations, elevating the partnership to unprecedented levels. This development's impact on Israel's regional standing cannot be overstated, particularly given how it complements rather than replaces Israel's independent military achievements. The enhanced partnership promises expanded political dividends alongside military cooperation.

Yet enhanced partnership brings corresponding obligations, especially when American intervention appears to address existential threats through significant risk assumption. Trump's directive requiring Israeli aircraft recall from Iran missions following ceasefire violations illustrates these new dynamics. Such incidents preview potential friction points ahead.

Israeli accommodation on issues that might complicate Trump's agenda becomes increasingly reasonable given the transformed relationship structure. The principled response to such requests should remain positive, provided they don't conflict with Israel's fundamental interests.

However, forthcoming discussions could address core issues including Iran enforcement mechanisms, potential Palestinian Authority negotiations as Arab normalization prerequisites, Syrian security arrangements within broader political frameworks, and Gaza war continuation parameters. Trump's declaration that he will "be very tough with Netanyahu regarding ending the Gaza war" signals these complex negotiations ahead.

Netanyahu's primary challenge involves ensuring that reciprocal discussions remain within acceptable policy parameters while preparing for arguments that existing or future concessions enable greater flexibility on difficult decisions.

Gaza combat operations and hostage recovery

Current media reporting suggests meaningful progress toward a "limited arrangement" with Hamas facilitating ten living hostages' return alongside 18 bodies. The proposed exchange involves 60-day ceasefire implementation, IDF combat zone withdrawals, expanded Gaza supply operations, and terrorist releases according to predetermined formulas. While specific details remain unclear, the arrangement's most significant element appears to be American guarantees linking the ceasefire to complete war termination.

The American-envisioned conclusion encompasses several key components. First, comprehensive fighting cessation across all dimensions, with Israeli forces maintaining border positions and security perimeters. Second, complete hostage return – both living and deceased. Third, Gaza Strip governance through technocratic structures guided by Egypt, additional nations, and potentially the Palestinian Authority. Fourth, Hamas – though severely degraded – would lose official governmental control while maintaining substantial Strip influence. Finally, portions of Hamas leadership would face exile from Gaza.

Concurrently, voluntary emigration opportunities would become available for interested Gaza residents across multiple countries providing US commitments. Strip reconstruction would proceed contingent upon complete military capability dismantlement.

This framework appears theoretically sound for addressing Israel's primary concerns. However, considering Hamas's residual capabilities, continued high popular support levels, overseas leadership's resource mobilization capacity, and demonstrated recovery patterns, such arrangements would likely enable rapid organizational rehabilitation. These factors become more problematic when considering Hamas's leverage through remaining living hostages and Israel's constrained military options.

Assumptions that civilian governance transfer to internationally-guided mechanisms would prevent Hamas rehabilitation ignore existing Strip power dynamics. Such frameworks would more likely provide Hamas cover rather than confrontation from international oversight bodies.

Given these scenarios, political leadership should maintain complete war objective achievement while pressing Washington counterparts to target Hamas leadership operating from Qatar and Turkey, simultaneously advancing voluntary emigration initiatives.

Iran conflict's expanding scope

The Iranian confrontation has entered its opening phase rather than reaching conclusion. Operation Rising Lion successfully achieved all designated objectives, optimally accomplishing every feasible military goal within its operational parameters.

Iran emerges wounded, humiliated, and revenge-driven. Assumptions about Iranian passivity would be strategically dangerous. Alongside capability reconstruction efforts and operational lessons learned, Iranian leadership will pursue Israeli retaliation opportunities regardless of timeline requirements. Intelligence and security officials must operate assuming Iranian surprise attempts without restraint considerations.

The first issue requiring Israeli-American agreement is enforcement of Iran's activities. Israel must clarify that enforcement without agreement is preferable to agreement without enforcement.

President Trump has repeatedly declared that Iran will not have military nuclear capability. From Israel's perspective this is extremely important, but not sufficient. We must also talk about limiting ballistic missiles and precision weapons, through which Iran planned to achieve against Israel influence similar to that of non-conventional weapons.

Iran must not receive any relief or benefit to convince it to sit at the negotiating table. The international community still has the option to impose sanctions on Tehran through the snapback mechanism, and this should be activated.

Syrian strategic calculations

Syrian developments exemplify new reality dilemmas facing Israeli decision-makers. Israel confronts delicate strategic choices requiring careful balance between opportunity and risk. Excessive threat focus could eliminate rare opportunities for northern border reshaping and regional influence expansion. Conversely, "Oslo process" style concessions might enable dangerous Islamist threats in critical areas.

Israeli experience demands cautious approaches, particularly regarding security deployment modifications for various scenarios. This caution becomes essential when engaging regimes led by jihadist figures whose Western-friendly presentations lack authentic testing and may represent survival tactics rather than genuine transformation.

Golan Heights status discussions remain completely unacceptable. The only acceptable modification involves Syrian regime de jure recognition of existing arrangements. The Golan Heights constitutes Israel's strategic eastern defense line. Golan Heights retention without peace agreements surpasses peace agreements without Golan Heights control.

Any agreements must guarantee Israeli aerial and ground operational freedom throughout Syria for minimum decade-long periods, including proactive operations against hostile establishment attempts. Syrian regime limitations must prevent agreements or alliance participation enabling hostile elements' Syrian establishment or operational bases across territorial, maritime, and aerial domains. These restrictions prevent Syrian transformation into corridors or focal points for threats against Israel from regional or extra-regional sources. Syria must also face restrictions on developing, producing, or acquiring strategic threat weapons including nuclear, biological, chemical, missile, and precision capabilities.

Israeli demands should include Druze community security guarantees while positioning Syria as potential Palestinian Gaza emigrant destination following Trump initiatives. Syria's suitability stems from Arab identity, regional proximity, and historical connections. Given expected extensive reconstruction requirements for millions of Syrian citizens, Palestinian Gaza integration wouldn't create exceptional burdens. These arrangements should integrate Israeli, American, and Syrian coordination frameworks.

Effective enforcement mechanisms must anchor all agreements. Accumulated experience demonstrates that agreements without enforcement lack meaningful value.

Strategic partnerships with conditions

Saudi Arabian peace agreement opportunities – representing the Arab world's most significant player – reach unprecedented accessibility levels. Iranian nuclear program strikes and "axis" dismantlement, including Hezbollah collapse and Assad regime disintegration, create new Middle Eastern realities where moderate Arab states recognize Israel as solution rather than problem against extremist Islam. Mohammed bin Salman's Vision 2030 provides foundation for demonstrating this transformation.

However, Saudi-Israeli relationship establishment must never be conditioned on Palestinian Authority status improvements. Post-October 7 Israel cannot afford questionable adventure engagement. Abraham Accords removed Palestinian Authority veto power over Arab-Israeli relationship establishment, and this authority must not be restored. Palestinian statehood, regardless of border limitations, constitutes Israeli security threats.

Agreement, alliance, or economic profit considerations must not override strategic judgment. Saudi Arabian peace agreement significance cannot be exaggerated, yet not every price justifies such achievements.

The post PM rides Iran victory wave into pivotal Trump summit appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.

The Biden administration is preparing to present a "take it or leave it" ceasefire and hostage-release deal to Israel and Hamas in the coming weeks, according to a senior US official speaking to The Washington Post. This move comes as Israeli forces recovered the bodies of six hostages in Gaza, including Israeli-American Hersh Goldberg-Polin.

The grim discovery has added new urgency to the months-long American-led negotiations, officials said. However, it remains unclear whether the development will make an agreement more or less likely in the near term. "You can't keep negotiating this. This process has to be called at some point," the senior official told The Washington Post. "Does it derail the deal? No. If anything, it should add additional urgency in this closing phase, which we were already in."

The Israel Defense Forces stated that the six hostages were killed by their captors "shortly before" they were found. US officials share a similar assessment, believing the hostages were executed not long before their bodies were discovered in a tunnel beneath Rafah, a city in southern Gaza.

Inside Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces mounting pressure from hostages' families and the public. Hundreds of thousands of protesters participated in nationwide demonstrations on Sunday, and Israel's largest labor union has called for a general strike on Monday.

Wow. Aerial video of massive protest in Tel Aviv, Israel tonight of nearly 300,000 people, demanding a ceasefire hours after bodies of 6 hostages were retrieved from Gaza tunnel. Largest rally since war: pic.twitter.com/2KtqWUk7ef

— Joyce Karam (@Joyce_Karam) September 1, 2024

 Hamas, in a statement, blamed Israeli bombings for the deaths, adding, "If President Biden is concerned about their lives, he must stop supporting this enemy with money and weapons and pressure the occupation to end its aggression immediately."

US officials were negotiating final details of a "bridging proposal" between Israel and Hamas last week, focusing on which hostages would be exchanged for specific Palestinian prisoners. The recent deaths of the six hostages have complicated these negotiations, requiring a reevaluation of the proposed exchanges.

Frank Lowenstein, a former State Department official, said, "Rhetoric aside, Netanyahu has never prioritized freeing the hostages. For now, he will be under a lot more domestic pressure to accept a ceasefire deal that saves the remaining hostages."

Both Netanyahu and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar have been described as stubborn in reaching a deal. Netanyahu has faced criticism from various quarters, including the Israeli security establishment and hostage families, for delaying an agreement by insisting on new demands.

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris have chosen not to publicly pressure Netanyahu into a deal, instead condemning Hamas for the hostages' deaths. This approach contrasts with the harsh criticism Netanyahu faces within Israel.

American Jewish groups have privately expressed frustration with Netanyahu but have been reluctant to challenge him publicly, according to a person familiar with internal discussions among several major organizations.

The discovery of the hostages' bodies has intensified political debates in the US Republican party, including Senator Lindsey Graham, who has called for continued support of Israel's military campaign and potential action against Iran. Democrats, meanwhile, have emphasized the need for an immediate ceasefire and increased humanitarian aid to Gaza.

Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill) said in a statement, "A ceasefire must be reached immediately that allows all remaining hostages to be released, humanitarian aid to flow into Gaza, and an elusive and neglected long-term vision for peace and stability to become a reality."

The post US poised to present 'take-it-or-leave-it' ceasefire proposal appeared first on www.israelhayom.com.