Gaza War Day 162: Progress in Hostage Negotiations, Inability to Plan For the Future of Gaza, Inflation Up in Israel
Tel Aviv Diary, March 16, 2014
ZOOM BRIEFING, TOMORROW SUNDAY, MARCH 17TH 11 AM EST, 5 PM ISRAEL TIME- Invitations will go out in the morning.
HOSTAGES
Hamas officially responded to the ceasefire offer made by Israel, in cooperation with the US, Egypt, and Qatar. This long anticipated response, (which had been known unofficially for days), is clearly a starting point for serious negotiations. Hamas’s counteroffer includes a six-week ceasefire and the release of approximately 40 hostages, including all women, elderly, and injured captives, as well as the women soldiers. In exchange, Israel would be expected to release around 1,000 prisoners from its jails.
Hamas has requested that the IDF permit Palestinians in southern Gaza to return to their homes in the North. The proposed agreement calls for further discussions on the release of the remaining hostages and the establishment of a permanent ceasefire once the initial group of hostages is freed.
The Israeli government faces challenges with two aspects of the proposal: Hamas’s desire to select the prisoners to be released and its demand for all residents to return to northern Gaza—whereas Israel is only open to permit the return of women and children. These issues could potentially be resolved through complex negotiations, with a consensus on the list of prisoners to be released and some compromise some compromise regarding the resettlement of northern Gaza.
Unfortunately, there are two big unknowns. Firstly, on our side is whether Netanyahu is willing to compromise to secure a deal; a deal that is favored by both the Army and the Security Services? Secondly, on the other side, there’s speculation about whether Hamas’s engagement in negotiations is merely a tactic to reduce the pressure exerted on them by Qatar and Egypt to reach an agreement, raising concerns about the danger they will ultimately back out. Regrettably, I have no answers to either of these questions.
Prime Minister Netanyahu delayed a Security Cabinet meeting from tonight to tomorrow night (Sunday night). Consequently, the departure of the Israeli delegation to the talks, initially scheduled for Sunday, will be delayed until Monday.
NO PLAN
During the latest Security Cabinet meeting, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant tried to persuade the Cabinet to consider the various strategies for the day after the war. According to the leaked reports, this is part of the discussion that took place:
Minister Yoav Gallant outlined four undesirable alternatives for the future of the Gaza Strip:
1) The worst: Hamas rule.
2) Following that: Israeli military rule, which would cost us soldiers' lives and divert military resources from readiness for the North and Judea and Samaria.
3) Next: Chaos — leading to the investment of considerable resources in dealing with the international community and unnecessary involvement in Gaza.
4) And the least bad option: Governance by another entity, a local body, but since it is not Hamas and it comes from Gaza, it means that from time to time, it would consider the opinions of Ramallah.
(In this last option presented by Gallant, he was stating that any other group in Gaza — that is not Hamas— is going to be tied one way or another with the Palestinian Authority. However, he does not want to use the name “Palestinian Authority” because it is toxic to some of the government ministers).
Ministers Regev and Levin attacked Gallant's statements, stating: "You are promoting the Palestinian Authority.”
Gallant replied: “Those paying the price today for the [government’s_MS] indecision are the IDF soldiers. The most senior officers say in discussions with the political echelon: The forces conduct a raid in a certain neighborhood, leave, and meanwhile, instead of introducing a local entity [to take control_MS], Hamas re-establishes itself — This way, the Hamas organization will not be dismantled.
Netanyahu refused to allow a serious discussion of these options. The cabinet is yet to have an extended discussion on the future for Gaza.
RAMADAN
Despite fears of potential violence, the first Friday of Ramadan in Jerusalem was observed peacefully. Around 60,000 Muslims gathered to pray at the Al Aqsa Mosque during this initial Friday of Ramadan. In a separate incident today, there was an attempted terrorist attack in the Jewish area of Hebron. The gunman, who opened fire from the nearby Muslim cemetery, was neutralized and killed.
CHUCK SCHUMER
The statement made by Senator Chuck Schumer and subsequently endorsed by President Biden, criticizing Netanyahu for doing more harm than good for Israel, continue to cause a stir. My initial reaction on Thursday was that Schumer’s comments would only serve to strengthen Netanyahu. However, at this time, I am uncertain. In an earlier time, when Netanyahu seemed infallible, such international critique would have undoubtedly strengthened him. Yet, now, when most of the country view Netanyahu as unfit for office, Schumer’s rebuke may be another dent in the Prime Minister’s armor. I discussed these points on I24 News this morning.
ANOTHER NIGHT OF DEMONSTRATIONS
This evening, another series of demonstrations took place in Tel Aviv and throughout the country. In Tel Aviv, two concurrent demonstrations took place: one showing solidarity with the hostage families and the other calling for an immediate national election. The core messages of the two demonstrations were not that different.
GAZA
Low-level combat continued in Gaza today, primarily in Khan Younis. The Nachal Brigade alone reported eliminating 250 terrorists in that area during the last two weeks.
POSSIBLE GOOD NEWS OR BALDERDASH?
In the realm of good news, or perhaps just hopeful anticipation of such news…
Hamas criticized the Palestinian Authority for appointing a new Prime Minister. This was the reply by Fatah, the ruling party in the P.A.:
You didn't consult anyone before you went for 7/10.
You are responsible and you are guilty of the greatest disaster in the history of the Palestinian people.
You want Iran to rule over us.
Your leaders live in 7-star hotels abroad, they also moved their families [from Gaza], and we are paying the price of the war.
The same is the case regarding negotiations with Lebanon. If the information below is true, then a negotiated deal is attainable — However, that is a very significant “if.”
The Lebanese Channel reported that Beirut’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has transmitted Lebanon’s official response to France regarding the recent proposal for normalizing the Lebanese-Israeli border. Lebanon’s response outlines a broad framework, indicating its willingness to promptly enforce Resolution 1701, provided Israel also adheres to the provisions of the same resolution. Furthermore, Lebanon has expressed readiness to resume tripartite meetings in Nakoura.
BUSINESS
Today, the Central Bureau of Statistics announced that the Consumer Price Index rose by 0.4% in February, marginally exceeding expectations. However, the annual inflation rate in Israel (reflecting the index’s rise over the last 12 months), eased to 2.5% in February, from 2.6% in January 2024. Concurrently, the trend of rising housing prices in Israel continues.
The 0.4% rise in the Consumer Price Index for February can be largely attributed to seasonal items, such as fresh fruits, which surged by 10.7%. Conversely, there were considerable price drops recorded specific sectors, with clothing prices decreasing by 2.5%, and homeowner housing services, falling by 0.6%.
–––––∞–––––∞–––––∞–––––∞–––––∞–––––∞–––––∞–––––
A PIECE OF HISTORY
UN Commission
On February 18, 1947, British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin announced in the House of Commons that the British government saw no prospect of a solution to the problems plaguing Palestine. Subsequently, on April 2, the British delegation to the United Nations requested that the UN Secretary-General convene a special session of the UN General Assembly to be convened as soon as possible to determine the future of Palestine.
The British decision to entrust the issue to the United Nations stemmed from several factors, which should be understood within the context of a post-World War II British Empire in decline. Although Britain had emerged as one of the victors, Britain faced immense economic and human tolls from the war, and increasingly relied on the United States for economic assistance.
Negative publicity arising from Britain's rejection of illegal immigrants compounded the difficulty to secure desperately needed financial aid. Moreover, the ongoing occupation of Palestine presented growing economic and military burdens. Having endured devastating casualties during World War II, the British public was unwilling to bear such hardships in Palestine.
The United Nations convened a special session on April 27, with the first agenda item addressing whether the Jewish Agency should be granted the right to represent the case for the Jewish people. Despite initial objections regarding the lack of precedent for non-governmental organizations to make presentations before the UN, Jewish Agency representatives were permitted to address the United Nations' first committee.
Abba Hillel Silver, Moshe Shertok, and David Ben Gurion represented the Jewish Agency. The primary agenda item was determining the composition of the special committee of inquiry. Following extensive deliberations, it was resolved that the United Nations committee would consist of representatives from eleven smaller states, excluding the five major countries.
Throughout the summer of 1947, the United Nations committee convened numerous hearings and meetings in Palestine to evaluate the region’s conditions. Thirteen public meetings and 18 closed sessions were conducted in Palestine, with 34 witnesses called upon. From Palestine, the committee proceeded to Beirut, where it gathered perspectives from the Arab governments. The final stop for the committee was in Geneva, where subcommittees visited camps for displaced persons and reported that nearly all displaced individuals expressed a desire to relocate to Palestine.
The committee issued two reports: a majority report and a minority report. The majority report, endorsed by representatives from Australia, Canada, Czechoslovakia, Guatemala, the Netherlands, Peru, Sweden, and Uruguay, advocated for the establishment of two independent states in Palestine – one Jewish and one Arab. In contrast, the minority plan, backed by India, Iran, and Yugoslavia, proposed the formation of a confederation comprising two subordinate states – one Arab and one Jewish.