The two parties disagree on whether the initial six-week cease-fire should be permanent, as Hamas demands, and whether Israel should completely withdraw from Gaza
Seems that’s the controversial part. Apparently it’s “unworkable” to ask an invading force to leave. Blinken is arguing for permanent Israeli occupation of Gaza.
Hamas: “Stop firing”
Israel: “That’s an unreasonable demands for a ceasefire!”
Unreasonable demand when the goal from the beginning has been settler-colonialism and the complete ethnic cleansing of the people they stole the land from.
That’s always where this was going to end. That future was written on Oct 7. The only question is, how much pain it takes to get there.
It’s obvious that the Israelis view their withdrawal and end of occupation in Gaza as a mistake and that it’s time for them to undo that mistake
Dubious. Hamas are supported by/proxies of Iran, as are Hezbollah who are currently expanding their fighting along the UN Blue Line on Israel’s northern border. Only viewing Gaza in a microcosm the IDF have the raw ability to crush and subjugate Hamas/Gaza, and that this is a terribad deal to take with Hamas - now or ever.
Zoom out and look at the whole of Israel and the region, and it is clear why the US diplomatic position is for this ceasefire.
They said they “don’t want to be killed” as part of the cease-fire requirement, a position that Blinken says is a “non-starter” with the Israeli demands.
Quote from article:
"A deal is on the table” that “the entire world is behind,” Blinken told a news conference. “Israel has accepted it, and Hamas could have answered with a single word: yes.”
In the event, Hamas took 12 days to issue its official reply. “You get to a point where, if one side continues to change its demands, you have to question whether they’re proceeding in good faith or not,” Blinken said.
Like the ceasing of fire part?
What Hamas is requesting changes to:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_2735
The Security Council,
Reaffirming the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations,
Recalling all its relevant resolutions on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question,
Underscoring the importance of the ongoing diplomatic efforts by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States aimed at reaching a comprehensive ceasefire deal, consisting of three phases,
- Welcomes the new ceasefire proposal announced on May 31, which Israel accepted, calls upon Hamas to also accept it, and urges both parties to fully implement its terms without delay and without condition;
- Notes that the implementation of this proposal would enable the following outcomes to spread over three phases:
(a) Phase 1: an immediate, full, and complete ceasefire with the release of hostages including women, the elderly and the wounded, the return of the remains of some hostages who have been killed, the exchange of Palestinian prisoners, withdrawal of Israeli forces from the populated areas in Gaza, the return of Palestinian civilians to their homes and neighborhoods in all areas of Gaza, including in the north, as well as the safe and effective distribution of humanitarian assistance at scale throughout the Gaza Strip to all Palestinian civilians who need it, including housing units delivered by the international community;
(b) Phase 2: upon agreement of the parties, a permanent end to hostilities, in exchange for the release of all other hostages still in Gaza, and a full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza; and
© Phase 3: the start of a major multi-year reconstruction plan for Gaza and the return of the remains of any deceased hostages still in Gaza to their families;
- Underlines that the proposal says if the negotiations take longer than six weeks for phase one, the ceasefire will still continue as long as negotiations continue, and welcomes the readiness of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar to work to ensure negotiations keep going until all the agreements are reached and phase two is able to begin;
- Stresses the importance of the parties adhering to the terms of this proposal once agreed and calls upon all Member States and the United Nations to support its implementation;
- Rejects any attempt at demographic or territorial change in the Gaza Strip, including any actions that reduce the territory of Gaza;
- Reiterates its unwavering commitment to the vision of the two-State solution where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders, consistent with international law and relevant UN resolutions, and in this regard stresses the importance of unifying the Gaza Strip with the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority;
- Decides to remain seized of the matter.
Certainly not unreasonable in any way as stated
That’s a full withdrawal, just after the withdrawal from cities in phase 1.
Hamas is just making excuses at this point. Amazes to still see the islamists still trying to pretend hamas aren’t getting what they want.
The thing is, they must know they won’t get what they ask for because of posturing by either side. It’s still not unreasonable to have your land back after being invaded. The longer it takes, the less likely the IDF will ever leave.
There’s plenty of pressure on Israel to leave. I don’t think that’s in doubt. Israel doesn’t need to stay to ensure hamas get eradicated - the Palestinians will do that themselves if mossad doesn’t get them first.
Hamas’s leader said just the other day that Palestinian deaths benefit them. It’s not surprising to see them keep coming up with excuses.
In their revised proposal, Hamas won’t commit to releasing any living hostages before Israel fully withdraws from Gaza.
That’s likely the reason Blinken considers their proposal unworkable.
