December 17, 2024

SHARE |

Assad’s Fall Prompts Optimism for Gaza Settlement

AP Photo/Ariel Schalit

Days after rebel forces entered Damascus and ended the 24-year rule of President Bashar al-Assad, U.S. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan began a visit to Israel, Qatar, and Egypt, saying on Thursday that his objective was to finalize an Israel-Hamas agreement for a cease-fire in Gaza and the release of hostages held there “this month.” The trip indicated that the Biden administration seeks to take advantage of a significant shift in the regional balance of power against Hamas, Iran, and other partners in Tehran’s Axis of Resistance to forge a Gaza pact before Donald Trump is inaugurated on January 20. Expressing the growing sense of optimism, Sullivan, addressing a news conference after his meeting with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his top security and policy chiefs, stated Thursday: “the surround sound of these negotiations is different today than it has been in the past.” Yet, he and the high-level regional officials he met with all cautioned that a final deal may still not be concluded.

A calculation that the balance of power in the region has moved decidedly against Hamas over the past several months has motivated the expectation that an agreement is within reach, after several previous iterations in which a deal seemed close but eluded negotiators. According to one U.S. official, speaking on background to journalists: “[U.S. officials] believe Hamas was waiting for lots of other actors and forces to come to their rescue…but the [late November] cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah, Hamas’ ally in Lebanon, made it clear that the conflicts to Israel’s north and south had been “decoupled.” The official added, “The fall of the Assad regime in Syria [a key member, as is Hamas, of Iran’s Axis of Resistance] has also changed the regional dynamics…contributing to the ceasefire talks’ momentum.” In addition, he noted that Israel’s continued military progress against Hamas’ infrastructure and the decimation of the group’s military and its senior leadership have placed growing pressure on Hamas to conclude an agreement.

Sullivan and other U.S. officials denied that President-elect Trump’s December 2 warning to Hamas had caused diplomatic movement, but others indicated the threats might have added urgency to the talks. The President-elect posted on his social media account: “Please let this TRUTH serve to represent that if the hostages are not released prior to [my January 20 inauguration], there will be ALL HELL TO PAY in the Middle East, and for those in charge who perpetrated these atrocities against Humanity…Those responsible will be hit harder than anybody has been hit in the long and storied History of the United States of America. RELEASE THE HOSTAGES NOW!” The post did not indicate what action Trump might take against Hamas, nor was it clear how U.S. military action against the group, if ordered, would add pressure on the group that Israel was not already applying.

Because of the altered regional balance of power, Israel and Hamas displayed new flexibility in negotiations. According to Sullivan: “We see movement from Hamas,” alluding to a softening of the group’s core demands. His comments comported with numerous reports in regional media that the group had signaled acceptance of an extended Israeli presence along parts of two strategic corridors in Gaza. That position would reflect a dropping of Hamas’ heretofore consistent core demand that it would not release any more Israeli hostages unless Israel agreed to an immediate and full withdrawal from Gaza and an end to the conflict. Reflecting movement on the part of Israeli leaders, Sullivan told journalists Netanyahu had indicated to him “that he would like to see this done.” The prime minister appeared to be facing substantial pressure from families of those still held by Hamas in Gaza, who argue that Israel’s successes against the Axis of Resistance in recent months had improved Israel’s overall security position to the point where it should compromise to bring the hostages back home.

Among other signs the negotiations were gathering momentum, David Barnea, the chief of Israel’s Mossad intelligence service, and one of the country’s primary negotiators, traveled to Qatar for talks last Wednesday. He is reported to also be working intensively with officials from Egypt as well as Türkiye, where some Hamas officials are said to be located. Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), an Iran-backed ally of  Hamas that is believed to be holding some of the hostages, sent a delegation, including its chief, Ziad al-Nakhala, to Cairo last week to discuss developments related to a potential hostage deal. Other reports suggested Hamas had begun trying to determine the location of all the Israeli hostages taken to Gaza, including those held by or transferred to control of other groups, in preparation for a release. Hamas’ canvassing for definitive information on the hostages might indicate that one sticking point referenced by National Security Advisor Sullivan during his trip might be resolved. In recent months, according to Sullivan: “Hamas has not been prepared to even do the basic things of coming to the table with the names of hostages [still held].” Some Israeli reports indicated Hamas had already passed along a list of hostages it is prepared to release in the first stage of a phased deal to mediators.

Optimism among mediators notwithstanding, there appear to be elements of the agreement under discussion that might still derail an accord. According to Sullivan, the framework pact retains the basic elements of a three-phase ceasefire and hostage deal laid out by President Biden in May. Sullivan explained that it is the judgment of U.S. officials, as well as those of mediating partners Qatar and Egypt, that “trying to proceed in phases and getting this thing started so people start coming out — that is the best way to get to the end of the process.” According to reports, mediators are crafting the agreement to begin with a 60-day cease-fire – similar to the agreement Israel and Hezbollah reached that involved a phased withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. However, some hostage families insist on a one-phase deal that sees all 100 captives, of which nearly two-thirds are believed still alive, be released at once. The demand for a one-phase approach has support among some in the Israeli government who want to see Hamas quickly forfeit the remaining leverage that flows from the continued holding of hostages.

More broadly, mediators have not clarified the issue that is certain to loom well after a ceasefire and hostage release deal is finalized – the question of who, or what entity, will govern the Gaza Strip over the longer term.  President Biden’s three-phase roadmap to a Gaza settlement stipulates that in phase three “a major reconstruction plan for Gaza would commence.” But the Biden plan, on which the current deal is reportedly based, does not stipulate final governing and security arrangements for Gaza. During his trip to the region, Sullivan described the framework under discussion as a road map to ending the war and to “a future of Gaza without Hamas in power.” However, Netanyahu and other Israeli hardliners have consistently expressed concern that an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza could set the stage for Hamas’ military and political revival.

At the same time, the prime minister and his allies have rejected U.S. and regional proposals for an Arab state or Palestinian Authority (PA) security force and governing authority in the enclave, insisting instead on an enduring right by the IDF to operate against Hamas and other militants in the territory. That demand is unlikely to be accepted by Hamas. In the absence of clearly defined security and governing arrangements for the “day after” the IDF completes its withdrawal, the prospects are significant for the current optimism to give way to another disappointing failure to reach an accord.