Hamas is Messing With All of Us
Praying for a Deal, But not Expecting One
As Shabbat Ends, Israel is Suspended Between Hope and Fear
In Friday’s Times of Israel, editor David Horowitz lays out the case for Israel concluding a hostage deal within the framework laid out on Israel’s behalf by President Biden back in June. A hostage deal that also averts regional war should be a no-brainer for Netanyahu. But...
The argument seems compelling. Israel’s military leadership reports that Hamas has been badly damaged by Israel’s campaign against them which began in October, halted for a week for a deal which freed 105 hostages, and has continued ever since. The IDF announced today that it has killed seventeen thousand members of Hamas’ armed wing. It has demolished Hamas infrastructure in every part of the Gaza strip.
Before Shabbat, Israeli negotiators concluded a second day of talks in Doha with the trio of mediators who have been acting as brokers for discussions of a truce and freedom for hostages for many months. The United States reported excellent progress as the talks involving Israel wound up. No matter that Hamas announced that it would not show up for the talks, and didn’t, and that they said that any deal must be based on the counter offer they made six weeks ago, which the Americans rejected at the time.
Commenting on the talks Horowitz wrote:
From what we are learning of the main ostensible areas of discrepancy between Israel and the mediators, it is apparent that Netanyahu’s insistence on some kind of mechanism to prevent the return of armed Hamas forces to northern Gaza is proving a problem. By contrast, we are given to understand, potential solutions are being advanced as regards his call for an ongoing Israeli presence along the Gaza-Egypt border, under and over which Hamas imported the weapons and materials for its war machine. Not much is being said about the prime minister’s reported demand for a US guarantee that, in principle, Israel would be able to resume its campaign against Hamas until the terror group is destroyed.
It would indeed be a huge relief to secure the freedom of the surviving hostages whose captivity is now in a heartbreaking 11th month. We pray for such an outcome, for the sake of them and their families as well as for the traumatized people of Israel as a whole.
Image: Demonstrators in Tel Aviv on August 17 Demand a Hostage Deal ————- Times of Israel
Moreover, there is also a good argument that such a deal would be good for Netanyahu himself. For those who suspect that he never does anything that will not advance his own interests, this provides some hope that he would in fact be open to a deal within the framework outlined in June. Indeed Netanyahu has been adamant that in recent days he has been seeking to clarify details, rather than departing from what the war cabinet agreed to, and President Biden presented to the world in June.
Nonetheless, by saying yes to the emerging terms, Netanyahu would expect to secure the release in the first six weeks of the deal of some 30 living hostages in the so-called humanitarian category — women, the elderly and the sick. Were the deal to hold up through its second and third envisaged phases, the rest of the hostages, alive and dead, would come home. A vital, major step would be taken toward restoring the covenant between Israel’s political and military leadership on the one hand, and its citizenry on the other, which was torn asunder when Hamas was able to smash through the fence, massacre some 1,200 people, mostly Israeli citizens, and abduct over 250 more.
Why Would Hamas Agree to Free the Hostages?
Horowitz ends his oped with a single sentence which bursts this hopeful bubble and reminds us that there is another party that has to sign on to the agreement.
Then, of course, there would remain the not-insignificant issue of what Hamas intends to say and do.
Netanyahu has argued that maintaining military pressure is the best way to force Hamas to agree to a deal. During the past week, Israel has done just that. The IDF reported that they destroyed a military headquarters that had been established in a former school, killing at least 31 Hamas members using precision low yield bombs.
They have fought Hamas in the North and in Khan Younis. As already mentioned, the IDF’s count of enemy dead in the fighting in Gaza was updated today to 17,000. They also report that half the senior Hamas leadership has been killed, including Sinwar’s deputy Mohammed Deif. If Hamas hopes to survive, surely they need a pause in the fighting more than Israel does.
In addition, the deal calls for the release of large numbers of prisoners held by Israel, ten for each of thirty hostages to be released in the first round and thirty in return for the eventual return of each of the remaining hostages who are living, and the remains of those who have died. Many of those who would be released have already been involved in the deaths of Israelis. These people would presumably strengthen the depleted ranks of the Hamas leadership.
In addition, the deal calls for the withdrawal of the IDF from populated areas of the Gaza Strip. Throughout the past ten months we have seen Hamas reasserting its role in areas vacated by the IDF even as fighting continued elsewhere in Gaza. Anyone other than Hamas who has tried to step into a leadership role in Gaza has been killed or intimidated. Therefore it seems unavoidable that Hamas would resume effective control of Gaza during the six week long truce called for in the deal’s first phase.
If Hamas Wanted a Deal on the Terms Presently on the Table it Would Have Agreed to one Before Now
The advantages for Hamas of agreeing to a truce are many.
The problem with this reasoning is that these advantages have been on offer for many weeks, and Hamas has not agreed to a deal. In June, the Americans were holding Israel back from entering Rafah, fearing that this would disrupt the negotiations. President Biden laid out the deal in June and American officials said it was now up to Hamas to agree to it. Hamas instead made new demands. The Americans said at the time that Hamas’ response was not compatible with what they had offered on Israel’s behalf.
For Hamas the consequences of not closing the deal in June were severe. The Americans effectively stepped out of the way, and Israel entered Rafah and destroyed the Hamas infrastructure there, killing whichever Hamas forces remained to resist them. Moreover, Israel took over the Philadelphia corridor over Egyptian objections, exposing the large network of smuggling tunnels that Hamas used to bring in weapons and supplies and exposing Egyptian complicity in Hamas’ survival and success. This gave the lie to the claim that Egypt also maintains a blockade of Gaza.
So, much as we hope that a deal will be reached and that Israeli hostages will be freed, we have to ask ourselves why Hamas would do that now, when they were unwilling to do it in June.
Difficult as it is, we must try to put ourselves inside the mind of Yahya Sinwar, the only decision maker who matters on the enemy side.
What was Sinwar thinking when he launched the uniquely brutal and horrifying attack on Israel, which he had carefully planned for months, if not years? Surely he knew that Israel would respond with overwhelming force. It seems to us that Sinwar’s own words during the war make this clear.
In June, after the Americans put forward the peace proposal which we are still hoping will bear fruit, CNN reported on a leak of Yahya Sinwar’s text messages, citing a report in the Wall Street Journal. Hamas leader said civilian death toll could benefit militant group in Gaza war, WSJ reports. While indicating that Sinwar hadn’t expected the operation to yield so many women and children as hostages, and that he likewise hadn’t expected Israel’s response to be as severe as it was, Sinwar is reported to have believed that the harm Israel was doing in Gaza was beneficial to Hamas.
“We have the Israelis right where we want them,” Yahya Sinwar told other Hamas leaders recently, according to one of the messages, the WSJ reported Monday. In another, Sinwar is said to have described civilian deaths as “necessary sacrifices” while citing past independence-related conflicts in countries like Algeria.
In June, US Secretary of State Blinken stated that what Hamas did in response to the offer would indicate whether they were serious about wanting to make things better for both Israelis and Palestinians. The quote just above shows that Sinwar did not want to make things better. Understanding this, it is not surprising that Hamas did not agree in June to the American proposal.
While the Americans continue to express optimism about the prospects of a deal today, it is difficult for us to understand the basis of that optimism. If we take Blinken’s argument seriously, we must conclude that Hamas wants more pain for Israelis and does not give any priority to saving the people of Gaza from more pain.
If Sinwar wasn’t expecting so many women and children to be taken captive that may explain why he was willing to trade them away in November for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel. He seems to have a different attitude about the remaining hostages. Taking them was part of his original plan to strike a massive blow at Israel’s prestige, morale and international reputation.
Unlike Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran Can Be Deterred
Finally, we should contrast the behaviour of Hezbollah and Iran with the behaviour of Hamas. In the case of Hamas, we can see that they are true to their own ideology. They believe that martyrdom is glorious and that any amount of Palestinians suffering is justifiable if it can inflict serious harm on Israel. This explains, in the end, why Hamas is unlikely to give up the hostages unless they believe that the deal will be catastrophic for Israel. Humanitarian considerations do not play a role in this reasoning, either towards Israelis or towards Palestinians.
Hamas’ consistency contrasts with the mismatch between the rhetoric and the behaviour of Hezbollah and Iran. If you listen to these two groups, they sound just like Hamas. But if you look at their actions, they do not match the words. Presented with the chance to inflict enormous harm on Israel by unleashing their arsenal of missiles, Hezbollah has chosen not to do it.
Why not? They know that the harm to Israel would be followed by a fate similar to what has befallen Hamas in Gaza. It seems that, unlike Sinwar, the leadership of Hezbollah don’t really want to become martyrs in the struggle for Palestine.
The same argument applies to Iran. Their bloodcurdling threats in the aftermath of the killing of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran (which Israel has not acknowledged as their work) have not been followed by any action. Like Hezbollah, the leadership of Iran is aware that the harm they will sustain if they strike Israel will be enormous and may threaten their grip on power. While they are eager to be seen as the champions of the Palestinians, they aren’t willing to match their words with actions.
This should give us some hope, as we see that Israel’s military power is a deterrent to Iran and Hezbollah in a way that it was not for Hamas. It was the belief that Hamas too was a rational actor, which would respond to economic incentives and cared about improving the lives of the people of Gaza, that led to Israel’s disastrous miscalculation of their intentions and the catastrophic Israeli security failure of October 7.
Three Predictions
Much though we wish otherwise, we expect that Sinwar won’t agree to a hostage deal and a truce on the basis of the framework being put forward by the US, Egypt and Qatar. Therefore fighting in Gaza will continue. Israel will eventually find and kill Sinwar, and perhaps after that Hamas will begin to disintegrate. We hope that more hostages will be found alive and rescued.
While Hezbollah will continue to harass Israel in the north and Israel will continue to inflict a price on them for doing so, Hezbollah will not unleash a truly devastating attack. When Israel is ready they will issue an ultimatum and Hezbollah will either agree to a truce or Israel will eliminate their capacity to inflict further harm.
Iran will do nothing. Israel will call their bluff conditioning their forbearance on the conclusion of a ceasefire. They have no wish to sustain the kind of harm that Israel has demonstrated that they can inflict on them.
If you value our work here at Canadian Zionist Forum, please consider a free or paid subscription. Paid subscriptions will help us to grow the site and support our efforts to build a widely heard voice for those who oppose the vilification of Zionism and want a future for Jews here in Canada. If you are a paid subscriber, you can leave a comment.
Thank you everyone for reading Canadian Zionist Forum.
Sadly I think you are right. However I want to add a couple of thoughts. For many months I did not want a deal as I knew it would be seen as a defeat for Israel, and indication that a Western nation simply cannot win a war against a terrorist monstrosity. However as time has past I now am seeing that Israeli society is fraying. I don't think the present government can continue and win this was successfully. I don't think this can go on for months longer. Not if the United States is going to signal to Sinwar that there are no circumstances under which it will agree that Israel and the West are prepared to fight until the end. I now want a deal and temporary quiet. But I agree it's not very likely.
Hi. Allow me to disagree with you. You may be praying for a deal but I am not. I do not believe surveys so I do not know what is the true proportion of Israelis who do not want a deal. I do know that there are bereaved parents of soldiers who have fallen in the war and there are families of hostages who do not want a deal. Not only will a deal release terrorists who will continue to kill Jews (as we saw recently), they will also be incentivized to abduct Israelis and also Jews outside of Israel. There are not only 100+ hostages in Gaza -- there are 10 million hostages in Israel. We are all being held hostage to Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran.
You hope that a regional war is avoided. I see it as inevitable. If you think Hezbollah and Iran are deterred by seeing what we did in Gaza, I think you misunderstand the Islamist mentality.
Finally, the title of your article is a no-brainer. Of course Hamas is messing with us. That is what they are best at. Expecting anything else from them is just naive. Expecting them respect any ceasefire is just naive and dangerous. On October 7th, there was a ceasefire in effect until 6:30 a.m. Israel time. Never forget that.
I hope in future you will see fit to quote news sites other than TOI. I hope you balance the picture you have with some rightwing news sites. You do not have to agree with them but you should be considering what they say.