Pause in Gaza fighting leaves future of Palestine at a crossroads

The parameters and mechanisms — encompassing numbers, aid distribution, fuel supply, scheduling, air strikes, and reconnaissance — in future deals related to military personnel could provide a template for future deals related to military hostages.

Israel seeks to implement a principle of three Palestinians in exchange for one Israeli soldier. At the same time, Hamas is pushing for a comprehensive deal involving all Israeli soldiers in exchange for all Palestinian prisoners.

However, there are additional critical elements to factor in. One key aspect is transitioning from a temporary truce to a lasting ceasefire. 

Hamas claims to have 50 women and children in its custody, while approximately 20 more are held by Islamic Jihad and other factions. If the initial deal is successfully executed, some proponents suggest extending its duration beyond the initial four days.

This extension would aim to include additional civilians in the agreement. Both Hamas and Netanyahu could potentially accept this extension to address the mounting demands and pressure from their allies and opponents. This could pave the way for discussions on other crucial elements, which include:

Ceasefire

Military Exchange Deal: Negotiating the release of military officers and personnel, including Americans, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners.

Humanitarian aid mechanism

Lifting the siege: Addressing the Gaza blockade issue and establishing a reconstruction mechanism to rebuild the region.

Security arrangements: Implementing security arrangements that resemble a long-term truce to maintain stability.

Governance arrangements: Considering governance structures in Gaza, which could involve a body comprising various political parties and figures.

Political path to statehood

Charting a political pathway toward recognising the state of Palestine as per the two-state solution.

Israel is currently in an advantageous position should parties explore the above option. The Israeli army now controls the northern Gaza Strip, has inflicted significant damage to infrastructure, successfully returned both civilian and military hostages, and eliminated several Hamas leaders.

Moreover, the security measures allow around 25,000 Israelis to return to their pre-conflict locations as of 6 October. Additionally, the Israeli army restored some of the deterrence lost on 7 October.

Hamas, on the other hand, can assert that it has remained a relevant and influential player amid the devastation, displacement, and casualties. It can be argued that Israel failed to remove it from the equation. Instead, it engaged in exchange deals and negotiations, resulting in the release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails.

Furthermore, Hamas has successfully reasserted the Palestinian issue and the two-state solution onto the regional and international agenda. It has also adjusted its rhetoric, focusing on international resolutions and the borders established in 1967.

Option 2

Netanyahu has consistently rejected the idea of a ceasefire, with rhetorical and military support from the United States and key Western European countries. Therefore, the recent civilian exchange deal and potential future exchanges appear to be temporary respites in an extended military operation.

This option will see the expansion of air strikes in the south, particularly in Khan Yunis, where 400,000 people have been displaced. The spectre of expulsion to Sinai might resurface, leaving some Palestinians in Gaza with no choice but to seek refuge between Rafah and Sheikh Zuweid. Thousands more could be given the option to resettle abroad.  

This would effectively mark a second Nakba for Palestinians, dealing yet another decisive blow to the Palestinian cause. It could cause permanent rifts between Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and Occupied East Jerusalem. The focus would shift from statehood to territorial divisions and economic solutions.

This option risks prolonged attrition warfare and street battles within the Gaza Strip, which is riddled with underground tunnels, of which only 20% were damaged, compared to the 80% of above-ground destruction.

Human losses and tragedies of bloodshed and displacement could become all too familiar scenes, desensitising both Arabs and the Western world. While unique in its own right, this war would add to a long list of humanitarian crises in the Arab region and beyond.

Spectre of regional war

The option to continue aggression on Gaza could ignite further violence in the West Bank and neighbouring areas, potentially destabilising the entire region.

On its part, Iran expressed dissatisfaction with Hamas for launching Operation Al Aqsa Flood without prior notification — a concern communicated by senior Iranian and Hezbollah officials to Hamas leaders.

However, if the war persists and poses a significant threat to Hamas — a key Sunni player in the "axis of resistance" — pressure may mount on Tehran, the leader of this axis, to activate its regional partners, proxies, and strategic assets to preserve its role in the Palestinian issue.

This escalation could risk sparking widespread conflict in the region, leading parties to disregard established rules of engagement and dangerously challenge set boundaries.