Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say
theguardian.com
Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line
Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line
He just wants genocide. It's infuriating seeing world leaders pretend they don't get that so they can get what they want out of Palestinian deaths.
Why do you assume these sources are telling the truth?
I’ll tell you a secret: he doesn’t want to get the hostages back yet. They’re serving as a casus belli right now.
won't somebody think of the warmongers?
Hey, getting having a casus belli that can be passed around to buy you time to bomb a city long enough before someone intervenes, especially if you can't singlehandedly deter many of the other armies to leave you alone, is a rare opportunity for small fish warmongers.
casus belli /kā″səs bĕl′ī, kä″səs bĕl′ē/
noun
An act or event that provokes or is used to justify war.
A matter or occasion of war; an excuse or a reason for declaring war: as, the right of search claimed by Great Britain constituted a casus belli in 1812.
An act seen as justifying or causing a war.
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition)
Found the Crusader Kings player
Bibi doesn’t want peace, he wants genocide.
In Bibi's eyes, every day that Hamas continues to exist is a good day. If Hamas ever ceases to exist, Israelis might go back to questioning his corruption charges.
That's not very HaBibi of him
I'm amazed the comment above this got downvoted lol like just have a laugh and move on with your life
I have a Jewish colleague who calls him Bibi. What’s the deal?
His first name is Benjamin, his family had other Benjamin’s, they nicknamed him Bibi.
Well, color me surprised... he's seemed so interested in a peaceful resolution.
He doesn't give a shit about hostages.
If he did, they wouldn't be blowing up all of Gaza.
If any die from IDF strikes, he'll just say that Hamas killed them and use their deaths to justify more bombings.
That’s right. So far 60 hostages have gone missing due to Israeli strikes. So, yeah. They don’t give a single shit.
Dude had a chance to stop the whole thing in its tracks and didn't take it.
This has always been about taking the land.
Hamas has stated they will repeat attacks like Oct 7th until all Israel is wiped out, and you think they will honour a ceasefire and actually accept peace?
Hamas only wants a ceasefire so they can regroup and rearm before attacking Israel again.
All he cares about is escalation. The United States needs to ditch Israel before they get us attacked too.
Yep, he's seeing the opportunity to finally kick the Palestinians out.
Kick out? More like gun down.
Before? Dude, radical islamic extremists have been calling us "the great Satan" for decades lol
They hate us for our support of Israel and thousands of people have already died because of it.
Nope, radical islamists hate US and anything that stands between them and dar-al-islam (world of Islam)...
He'll rather kill them all with his own hands rather than stop the war. The moment genocide is over he's next in line to get fucked. So long hostages. This is what you get for electing sociopaths I guess.
At this point he doesn't have a choice. Hamas offered to release about a dozen hostages for a ceasefire.
The Israelis repeatedly declared that there won't be any ceasefire without the release of all the hostages.
If he accepts anything else he's most likely to loose all control.
Of course he did.
The hostages are much more valuable to Israel in captivity, so they can continually exploit them for genocidal justifications.
This is simply not true.
There were talks about up to 15 hostages, of 239 in demand for 4 days of ceasefire. Hamas needs this ceasefire desperately to regroup and assess the damages. The chaos now serves Israel well and apparently it puts much more pressure on Hamas. The ground invasion proves very effective. Maybe as Hamas becomes more desperate the "price" for the hostages will drop. Alternatively, if Israel will allow them to regroup, the war will take significantly more time because it will be much harder to eradicate them. Maybe the Israelis know where the hostages are held and after a ceasefire the hostages will be transferred to a different hideout, or smuggled via the tunnels to Egypt and from there to who knows where.
Neutral and Israel alligned countries have been calling for a humanatarian pause on purely humanitarian grounds. Even if you don't care about the hostages, that Hamas was willing to offer them means that they had an interest in such a pause as well; making Israel the only obstacle to it happening. That is to say, the severity of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is squarly on Israel's shoulders. The most charitable reading of the situation is that they have determined that the tactical advantage of blocking a humanitarian pause outways the civilian lives they put at risk by doing so.
And even that charitable reading means they are committing collective punishment.
It's not about the hostages any more. They are the excuse Israel needs to eradicate a whole country.
Israel cares a whole lot about its hostages. Evidence for that are the prices they were willing to pay in the past.
But sure, let's go with your logic. Why can't Israel just go carpet-bombing the crowded part in the south of the Gaza strip that all the refugees fled to? It would be a very effective way to eradicate them all. They are so crowded in such a small area that it's possible to kill a couple hundred thousands in a single day. Wow, Israel has a lot to learn on how to ethnically cleanse a region.
Netanyahu has been on confrontation with the families of the hostages for weeks now.
This proves nothing. Of course there would be people who wish for any deal regardless of the conditions and it is not surprising that they will confront the government about it.
!remindme 1 week "hmmmm"
The price of Hamas not "regrouping" is not worth committing genocide for.
Of course he doesn't want to de-escalate the situation.
If he did that, things might calm down and fewer people will vote based on his promises of being strong on security. Also if he did that, his hard-right backers (who need a hot conflict to keep taking Palestinian land politically acceptable) will attack him for being 'soft' on security.
The logic of it all is genocide of course, but Bibi wants that if the alternative is him being out of office and back in court defending himself against corruption charges.
For some of the hostages. Not all of the hostages.
Which is a very important distinction that people here seem to overlook. If you give in to a terrorist's and hostage taker's demands you're inviting more terrorism and hostage-taking because it worked.
Let's just keep bombing the shit outta Gaza then I guess. No other options.
Honestly, at this point there aren't any other options. Because the last major conflict in the region was 5 years ago in 2018, there was a real feeling around the world that Hamas/Gaza had "turned a corner" and was open to living in peace with its neighbors. That's why you had seen rising calls from the West, even the US, calling for a freeze on new settlements in the West Bank. And there was a real hope that maybe covid had "reset" the expectations of both sides in the same way that the end of the Cold War seemingly had.
But it looks like Hamas had no intention of that. Instead they unleashed an attack and had five years of rocket build up behind it instead of the normal two. At this point I don't know how many more times we need to Hamas the show that it's uninterested and even the ideal concept of peace. Even Hezbollah, in southern Lebanon, a fellow terrorist organization; seems to have the ability to respect a border with Israel. So at this point yes tearing him off down even with the understanding that a new terrorist like organization might take its place is preferable to the status quo. Because there is a reasonable chance that even a new terrorist organization could respect a border, and not attack its neighbors. And honestly if a Taliban-esque group ends up taking over it probably be a better outcome for the day-to-day of Gazans. That's f***** up as that is.
Honestly all this will do is infuriate more Gazans who may have lost everything, and will want vengeance. Continuity the cycle. I get Hamas is an issue but making Gazans suffer for it doesn't help anyone.
How much more angry can they get? Like they're angry enough to behead children, and cheer raped corpses through their streets. What more do they have to offer?
I can't believe I have to say this, but hamas ≠ Palestinians, Just like Israel's government ≠ Jewish people.
Hamas didn't cheer those corpses, common Palestinians did. There's extensive polling in the region and Hamas enjoys widespread support. It's believed that if elections happened today in the West Bank that Hamas would win.
While Hamas might not represent the Palestinian diaspora, they definitely represent the Palestinians located in the Gaza Strip.
Who did extensive polling? Who says hamas enjoys widespread support? Wide spread support in what? Do you believe that Hamas would allow a proper free election? The amount of children in Gaza, are they being represented here? How many Palestinians were out cheering in the street? When Israelis do it regarding bombs being dropped on gaza, does that make it ok? Does that represent enough Israelis to paint them with the same brush? E - for source https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/20/israelis-cheer-gaza-bombing
And yet nowhere did anyone claim otherswise 😕 nor does it improve the situation or change how Bibi is viewed now
(judging by how you phrased this comment)
The headline implies otherwise.
The headline says nothing about the number nor implies anything.
This is why you need to read the rest of an article.
The hostages are a group that's assumed to be complete. That's like if someone stole your tires off your car and offered to give "your tires" back to you but only 2 of the 4. People assume they offered all the tires if the headline doesn't say otherwise.
If you include the partial hostage release, it essentially robs the story as it's clear why you wouldn't do a deal for some of the hostages. Making any deal for some of the hostages is stupid.
I think this is dumb. The title didn't say all hostages. The article didn't say all hostages. You invented this in your own head then decided to build an argument around it.
I mean future articles covering it have said things like "Ceasefire for $x hostages rejected" for exactly this reason.
Sure but your case is still weak and honestly not even there.
"Ceasefire-for-hostages"
Would you assume that they're asking for a ceasefire in a percentage of the territory or the full territory?
I wouldn't assume anything.
That's not the truth. When you hear the title: "Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say"
Do you assume that it's 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory?
I think if you want the truth then stop being lazy and read the whole article instead of getting your information from misinterpreting headlines.
I think Netanyahu has a similar look about his eyes as Putin? It's like they're monsters inside and are communicating how little empathy and concerns for others they have inside, almost as a warning. Anyone else feel the same thing?
I think it's the military training plus a little extra sociopath on the side.
It sounds like these sources may be members of Hamas' negotiating team, which I don't exactly know that that's a reliable source.
It doesnt sound like complete BS that Hamas probably doesnt know the exact number, names and placement of hostages at the moment. They probably have a good idea but no definite list.
When Putin was invading Ukraine everyone was calling for the Russians to just kill Putin. When Hamas invaded everyone was calling for the Palestinians to kill Hamas themselves.
Awfully silent these days though now israel is the party committing war crimes.
Telling Palestinians to kill Hamas leaders is useless because the top Hamas leaders are actually living abroad, unlike Putin who stay cooped in Russia.
Awful use of the word "everyone"
You're right I should have clarified. European and Americans which have always yelled that violence against politicians is never justified did a 180 on their morals when they didn't like someone.
Globally, we're going to need to develop approaches for de-radicalizing large groups of people. Even if we can start on the direction towards peace in this situation, both the Israeli and some segments of Palestinian people seem radicalized to the point of no return, where no true solutions is even possible. I see the same thing in the US with whatever tf you want to call the Republican party. They're over the cliff. No pulling them back. Yet we need a way to de-radicalize these people otherwise there is no path forward.
You dont have to leave Israel and palestine to find more groups. Have you seen what kinds of people bibi is courting to stay in power? Ultra-orthodox far right netters who are publically asking for a cleansed ethno-state.
Scum propping up scum as always.
Considering it wasn't a return of all of the hostages and additionally Hamas said they intend to repeat the terrorist attack that sparked this, what motivation does Netanyahu have to stop until Hamas is destroyed?
That Hamas did was abhorrent, as was the response of Israel.
What motivation do Hamas have to just take the current occupation of Gaza and living in such a way? Genuinely curious.
This just seems like nobody will win and everybody will suffer. For what?
To keep the wheels of the military industrial complex turning
Less lives lost, even in the long term. We won't know what would have been, but there may well have been a diplomatic solution that got Gazan independence. But Hamas is built on violence is the answer.
Your answer is basically “suffer forever so nobody dies trying to stop the suffering”.
Well, yeah, if you care about lives on both sides...
That's a bit silly. Sentencing a whole population to "suffer forever" isn't caring for them.
It's like you didn't even read what he said.
Nah, I think people just didn't get that I was saying the reason someone would view how Gaza was like before 10/7 as good, could only be because you only care about Israeli civilian deaths and not Palestinians.
Explaining jokes kind of ruins them, but I guess in this case I overestimated people.
Use the /s
So your comment was sarcastic? (which kind of seems obvious in hindsight, woops)
I don't really get your explanation to be honest and how what you said relates to that.
Why would a two state solution continue the suffering?
In the West Bank, with no Hamas presence, Israeli settlers backed by the IDF come kill them and take their homes. The Israeli leadership doesn’t want a two state solution because extreme Zionists are in power.
Also, the Gaza settlements were dismantled in 2005, before Hamas came to power in 2007.
They went from occupation to siege. Not much improvement. I also wasn’t talking about Gaza so try to stay on topic.
I was taking about Gaza, since that's where Hamas is primarily active, and that's what the original comment was about. That's why I was focusing on Gaza.
I’m talking about Palestinians in general because they all get brutalized and Hamas is used as justification when they are only in one territory. Hamas is used as a distraction from the fact that Israelis just want to steal all of Palestinians land.
Regardless, the occupation in Gaza turned into a blockade/siege, why do people say they occupation stopped like that meant anything in practical terms for the citizens on the ground.
They weren't in power when Hamas came to power. Both sides have been pushing each other towards wanting to annihilate each other. But do you think a two state solution would minimize the suffering, but is not a feasible outcome?
A two-state solution was viable before Israel settled people in the middle of the west bank.
As an intentional tactic of Zionist settlers, it is now impossible to have a defensible border.
The only way forward now is to end apartheid and give full rights to the civilians living in the West Bank and Gaza.
Zionists will claim this “destroys Israel” or other nonsense we heard from South African defenders of apartheid.
Didn't Israel remove all Gaza settlements in 2005? Seems like they could do the same for the West Bank. And why would that be needed for an independent Gaza?
Israeli Zionists would rather genocide Palestinians than give up their West Bank settlements.
I would also be in favor of ending racist government policies and giving full rights and protections to Palestinians, but that is really difficult with the terrorist actions.
That's saying "the beatings will continue until morale improves".
It's an escalation ladder, both sides need to deescalate together to lower hostilities.
Saying “both sides” is siding with the oppressor.
The Zionists I’m talking about funded and propped up Hamas. Likud is not younger than Hamas. You seem to have a very limited understanding of this.
Sure, maybe, you're right I have only spent a few hours looking into the origin and spread of Hamas. But whether Hamas was funded by Zionists is irrelevant to whether their use of violence creates more or less suffering overall. In response to the original question, I think Hamas is causing much more harm and suffering to the people of Gaza by their excessive violence than diplomatic efforts likely would have.
But why shift it on Hamas when it's Israel breaking every humanitarian law? I'm asking seriously. Whatever response Hamas expected, I'm not sure it included bombing every single hospital or it's vicinity in one night (which happened already)
Because the question was about Hamas not Israel. And Hamas actually benefits from an overreaction from Israel, since it will further radicalize the population, giving more credence to their stance of violence. So they may well have been hoping for exactly the response they are getting. But the issue is in so violently pushing for a maximalist dissolution of Israel goal, they gave up their chance at achieving independence.
For the time being, and prior to cutover 7th, the two-state solution was either perpetually on hold or completely unworkable because of Israel (in both cases). Will it help stop the stuffing from moving on? Maybe if it's implemented properly, yes.
Well, lucky for him he didn't even entertain the ceasefire to see if he could have gotten them all back.
According to random sources that may or may not be lying.
The ceasefire would have happened in return for some of the hostages. Why would they give them more?
Ceasefires end, otherwise it's called a truce. Hamas probably didn't want to give up their strongest negotiating chip. In saying that, keeping hostages in this way is a war crime too.
Negotiating is the only path forward. Netanyahu rejecting the offer outright leads to more death and violence in the short and long term.
If Israel don't negotiate in good faith, why would Hamas stop terrorist attacks? Your rhetoric goes both ways.
Just the short term really. The least deaths in the long term from a game theory perspective is to make the value of the hostages zero or even negative.
Israel's biggest mistake in the hostage back and forth was in the past giving up like 1000 fighters for some hostages.
Instead Israel should occupy like an additional acre of Palestine everytime a hostage/day is taken. Domestically the loss of territory seems to be the only thing that matters to Palestinians, in terms of political support. So they need to take that away.
Your game theory is only considering the lives of hostages in the short and long term. Thousands are dying in the meanwhile.
Thousands more would die in the next war for hoatages if they're allowed to be viable. Long term, peace on the '67 borders is the only way to minimize total casualties.
Hamas has proven over the last 20 years that it will continue to attack Israel no matter what. It's proven that it doesn't care about the lives of Palestinians.
I took agree that peace leads to less death. The question is how to get there.
Hamas are a terrorist organisation who committed a horrible act. Hamas are not in power in the west bank, yet the Palestinians there have suffered apartheid and lose land to Israeli settlers in breach of international law. This is happening for years.
If we look at stats from before October, the loss of lives is clearly on the Palestinians side to a much higher degree. If we look at since October, it's the same.
Hamas commits horrible acts. Israel commits horrible acts.
Keeping civilian hostages as human shields is a war crime. Indiscriminately bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure is a war crime.
Israel clearly isn't indiscriminately bombing Gaza.
That should be expected since only one side spends money on defensive technology. Hamas has been complaining about Israeli air strikes since it came to power. It's spent billions on unguided rockets and ripping up infrastructure. But it's built zero bomb shelters for it's people, even admonishing civilians trying to use the built tunnels for shelter. It's installed zero radar systems. It's purchased zero anti-aircraft guns. It's done absolutely nothing to protect it's citizens and continues to start new wars.
Why would we expect the death tolls to be equal? That's like me, an American complaining that healthcare in America isn't available for everyone like it is for Canadians and demanding that Canada fix that problem.
I would call bombing hospitals and refugee camps indiscriminate bombing. Some people are given warnings. Some are not. So perhaps I should clarify that not all of their bombing is indiscriminate. Much is.
Proportional response and efforts to minimse civilian casualties are required under war conventions. This is not happening.
Your point about only one side having the capability to be hugely aggressive onky bolsters my point. Israel is the aggressor in such a situation.
I am not saying Hamas is a good government. Both sides can be terrible. However, Hamas not building bomb shelters does not make it ok for Israel to bomb citizens indiscriminately.
I don't expect the tolls to be equal. I do however take note that when Israel uses aggressive actions by Hamas for justification, that they are in fact the aggressors in the majority of cases with injury or death.
War is horrible. Civilians die. However, Israel's policy seems clearly, with the current and past events, to be genocide. They are trying to eliminate the Palestinian people from land they want.
That seems to be more because you don't know what the word "indiscriminate" means rather than that adjective being an accurate description of Israeli's bombing campaign.
Actually only the second is required. And the second is happening. "Proportional response" is something that can be required by private party treaty as a peacetime control, but it's not part of the rules of war.
Actually it shows the opposite. Israel could have done what it's doing at any point since the last major conflict and ceasefire in 2018. Their lack of aggression and desire for peace kept them from doing so and they only did so once provoked by a frankly disgusting series of acts that forced them to reconsider the viability of peace with Hamas.
That's the opposite of aggression.
To believe this you must believe the IDF is one of the most incompetent military forces on the face of the planet.
Did you even read the definition you linked to. " not discriminating or discerning; lacking in care, judgment, selectivity, etc "
They are bombing hospitals without care that it is a hospital. They are trying to justify it, but that's not the same as being justified or mindful.
Your next point is that Israel by virtue of having firepower greater than Palestine is good by virtue of not already being on a bloody rampage? We don't reward a murderer for eating in the prison canteen without murdering the other inmates. Your argument is absurd.
I said war conventions, you changed the goalposts and said rules of war. That's a sneaky way to try and undermine my point, which is valid.
Also paying lip service to slight reduction in civilian casualties is not the same as prioritizing.
What justification could you possibly have for the annexation of the folan heights and other areas in the west bank that shows Israel seeking a peaceful solution, which the majority of the international community sees as a two state solution. Israel is purposely undermining that effort in contravention of international law for decades.
Whereas before it was a slow genocide, now it is slaughter. It's. Een poutbrf out in this chain already but it's worth pointing out again that over 50% of the Palestinians are under 18.
The lessons of the Holocaust have been lost to history. It's a sad reflection on humanity that the nation state with those that lost the most are the very same that willfully inflicting the horror in others.
Oh and Israel cares so much about civilians lost. Perhaps you should check the numbers of killed and injured people on both sides even before 7.10, to get a bit of perspective.
I mean they clearly do. A cheap and WW2 era artillery bombardment of the region could have killed an easy 200k in a week.
The UN believes a modern conflict will kill about 9 civilians for every militant. Hamas' government last I checked reported about 11k casualties, 100% civilians. If that's the IDF would need to have killed 1,200 Hamas fighters to meet that ratio. Given that there's an estimated 20-40k fighters in Gaza we should expect 180k-360k casualties if the IDF nominally completes their goal of eliminating Hamas military.
The way I read it was a ceasefire in return for some of the hostages. Nobody floats their final offer with the first contact.
Israel needs to reset the value of hostages in the long run. They can't afford for hostage taking to be viable in the long run. And as long as they are successful militarily; there's no real reason for them to budge from their position.
The deal that went off was before that statement by Hamas.
Hamas has been making such statements for years They want Israel off the map. Even the Hamas Charter of 1988 put this desire onto paper.
Wanting an occupying force off the map shouldn't come as a shock to anyone, since Israel should have never existed (I'm for a one joint state solution where Palestinians get freedom and rights too but it's not too hard for me to understand Hamas' "radical" idea).
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a deal for a five-day ceasefire with Palestinian militant groups in Gaza in return for the release of some of the hostages held in the territory early in the war, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.
Negotiations resumed after the launch of the Israeli ground offensive on 27 October, but the same sources said Netanyahu had continued to take a tough line on proposals involving ceasefires of different durations in exchange for a varying number of hostages.
An estimated 240 people were taken hostage after fighters from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups based in Gaza, as well as civilians, crossed the reinforced border fence separating the territory from Israeli towns and kibbutzim.
According to three sources familiar with the talks, the original deal on the table involved freeing children, women and elderly and sick people in exchange for a five-day ceasefire, but the Israeli government turned this down and demonstrated its rejection with the launch of the ground offensive.
On Thursday the US national security council spokesperson John Kirby said Israel had agreed to daily four-hour “humanitarian pauses”, with the aim that the small breaks in bombardments could aid the passage of hostages out of Gaza.
In mid-October, the former Mossad operative David Meidan, who negotiated the release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from Gaza over a decade ago, told Haaretz: “There’s no doubt that the first issue the state has to deal with is the matter of the captives … The window of opportunity for this is very narrow.
The original article contains 1,382 words, the summary contains 257 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
bibi is a warmonger, always has been
That'd surely had been a bad idea. I mean, that would disrupt Hamas&Bibi's spiral of escalation, right?
This is his only way of staying in power. Fuck Bibi