The fact that the Israeli government is acting in bad faith and doesnāt actually care about the hostages doesnāt mean that the Israeli people donāt care.
The fact that people who arenāt genocidal maniacs desperately want the hostages to be freed means that getting them back would be a huge get for the Israeli government, worth many times more than a temporary truce is.
The fact that the Israeli government is acting in bad faith and doesnāt actually care about the hostages doesnāt mean that the Israeli people donāt care.
Okay, but leverage is typically supposed to be against the one youāre negotiating or dealing with, and Hamas is quite clearly up against the Israeli government at this point in time.
The fact that people who arenāt genocidal maniacs desperately want the hostages to be freed means that getting them back would be a huge get for the Israeli government, worth many times more than a temporary truce is.
I donāt see how that follows. The Israeli government is quite clear in its goals - it has killed hostages on its own initiative. It cares only insofar as it would look bad to not negotiate for hostage a release.
A ceasefire is far more important to Hamas than Israel. Israel wants to keep hammering Gaza. If the negotiations fail, then the answer isnāt āWell, now we can use our leverage!ā, itās āFuck, our only leverage has gotten us literally nothingā.
If the negotiations fail, then the answer isnāt āWell, now we can use our leverage!ā, itās āFuck, our only leverage has gotten us literally nothingā.
Which is basically what Israel is offering. Theyāre asking for the political points from getting the hostages back and will invade and/or bomb the shit out of Rafah no matter what.
Or to simplify: giving everything in exchange for basically nothing is a bad deal. Hamas knows it, the Israeli government knows it and the NYT knows it.
The latter two are just gaslighting people about it to pretend that the Israeli government is being anything approaching reasonable.
Which is basically what Israel is offering. Theyāre asking for the political points from getting the hostages back and will invade and/or bomb the shit out of Rafah no matter what.
Theyāre offering a 40-day ceasefire, which would be more beneficial to Hamas than to Israel. Itās not inherently ridiculous for Hamas to accept in exchange for the hostages. The issue is that Israel isnāt serious, and will dance around with terms so they can claim Hamas rejected it again.
Or to simplify: giving everything in exchange for basically nothing is a bad deal. Hamas knows it, the Israeli government knows it and the NYT knows it.
But itās not everything. The hostages are minor at most, and leverage unutilized is as worthless as not having leverage at all. Furthermore, all negotiations are done by the relative positions of the negotiators - if Hamas wants to hold out for a better deal, thatās certainly a valid strategic decision. But it must also be recognized that it is quite probably long odds since Israel is overwhelmingly in the better position at this point in time.
Once Rafah is taken, this whole miserable affair is going to wind up. And almost certainly not in a good way.
Speaking PURELY from a strategic perspective, what do you think the hostages CAN be traded for? What is something that is realistic for the Israeli government to offer other than a temporary ceasefire? Knowing the Israeli governmentās current position and goals? Not āWhat would be MORAL for them to offerā, what, realistically, can Hamas get out of the Israeli government with these hostages that would be more useful than a 40-day ceasefire and the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners?
The latter two are just gaslighting people about it to pretend that the Israeli government is being anything approaching reasonable.
But neither the article nor the headline have the tone youāre talking about.
Theyāre offering a 40-day ceasefire, which would be more beneficial to Hamas than to Israel.
What are you basing that assumption on?
Edit: come to think of it, the opposite is very much the case: a 40 day pause will take the international pressure off Israel long enough that the media moves onto other things. Meanwhile, Palestinians are just as dead 40 days later but with a fraction of people still paying attention.
Itās not inherently ridiculous for Hamas to accept in exchange for the hostages
Yeah it is. Itās basically the equivalent of being broke and jobless and selling your house for $5000. Sure, you can pay rent for a while with the $5000, but itās much less than the house is worth and when the moneyās spent, youāre homeless AND just as penniless as you started out.
Only instead of a house, itās tens if not hundreds of thousands in civilian lives.
The issue is that Israel isnāt serious, and will dance around with terms so they can claim Hamas rejected it again
Itās both: if they were serious, they wouldnāt make such a ridiculously bad offer.
Israel is overwhelmingly in the better position at this point in time.
I wouldnāt on that persisting, though, as public opinion both domestically and internationally is increasingly worsening for the Israeli government as sympathy for their victims grow and outrage at the many atrocities spreads.
Once Rafah is taken, this whole miserable affair is going to wind up
Nope. The Israeli government wonāt stop at that.
But neither the article nor the headline have the tone youāre talking about.
Because the article and headline are muddling the waters after Israel has already (almost immediately) rejected the deal. Gaslighting isnāt always about tone.
Too many factors to count. If you really want to get into a discussion about why Hamas benefits from a ceasefire more than Israel, we can - but I would prefer to keep this conversation on the issue of the negotiations as a whole.
If nothing else - the fact that Hamas has been trying to get a ceasefire deal out of the hostages and signalled a conditional willingness to accept a temporary ceasefire (though not on terms Israel finds acceptable) suggests very strongly that Hamas sees a ceasefire as beneficial to them.
Yeah it is. Itās basically the equivalent of being broke and jobless and selling your house for $5000. Sure, you can pay rent for a while with the $5000, but itās much less than the house is worth and when the moneyās spent, youāre homeless AND just as penniless as you started out.
Only instead of a house, itās tens if not hundreds of thousands in civilian lives.
Okay. So you donāt sell the house. The house is foreclosed on. You get nothing.
What is the benefit?
I wouldnāt on that persisting, though, as public opinion both domestically and internationally is increasingly worsening for the Israeli government as sympathy for their victims grow and outrage at the many atrocities spreads.
Take a look at the Israeli government. Not the concept of Israel as a rational (if amoral) world actor. Take a look at who is making the decisions right now, and how their grip on power is still firm both by legal means (the Knesset, short of snap elections, will not be replaced anytime soon) and by manipulation of Israeli popular opinion (the majority of Israelis still overwhelmingly get their news from Israeli sources, which have engaged in a monstrous amount of self-censorship regarding the genocide in Gaza after Oct 7).
With that in mind, what, in the next few months, do you expect public opinion in foreign countries to do to shift those decision-makers? Realistically speaking?
Nope. The Israeli government wonāt stop at that.
You misunderstand. When I say āWind upā, I donāt mean āThe genocide stopsā. I mean āThe genocide rapidly reaches completion.ā Once Rafah is taken, Israeli occupation of the Gaza strip is total once more, and theyāve already got massive āhumanitarianā camps to use as an excuse to starve and deport Palestinians.
Because the article and headline are muddling the waters after Israel has already (almost immediately) rejected the deal. Gaslighting isnāt always about tone.
Israel hasnāt formally rejected the terms yet. It could very well just be posturing, especially since Israel sent negotiators back to Egypt after the announcement of Hamasās acceptance of the new deal. I think more likely itās stalling for time, but itās far from certain.
I mean yes and no. Have you seen the protests in Israel? Yeah those arenāt because the Israeli public suddenly cares about human rights; theyāre equal parts because Netanyahu wants to get rid of democracy in Israel and because of his disregard for the hostagesā lives in his assault on Gaza, so they are doing their job. And letās remember that their real role hasnāt come yet; these hostages are there for after the āwarā ends because without any hostages Israel will be turning Gaza into beachfront real estate.
And letās remember that their real role hasnāt come yet; these hostages are there for after the āwarā ends because without any hostages Israel will be turning Gaza into beachfront real estate.
How many hostages have the IDF killed already? Do you really think that if turning Gaza into beachfront real estate and the handful of hostages that are left will be enough to stay the Israeli far-right? Hamas already released 150 hostages once just to acquire a four-day ceasefire. You really think that the hostages are being held for when the āwarā ends? Do you really think theyāre that valuable? If you were in Israelās position, with Israelās goals and morality, would you stop for the hostages? When the āwarā ends, the IDF will either have taken them or buried them under the rubble like every other civilian in the strip.
The hostages are not the trump card people here seem to think they are, and considering Hamasās negotiating attitude towards them, they are far more aware of that than people here, who seem to want to think that the hostages are the major thing ākeepingā Israel from completing their genocide, when the fact is that theyāre well on their way, as though the hostages were not an issue at all. The only concession that was realistic was the release of prisoners and a temporary ceasefire; the idea that Israel, which has yearned for this genocide for decades, will suddenly stop for hostages theyāve already shot and bombed to death, and an unknown amount of whom are already dead, is insane.
Hostages do not have the value people here are telling themselves they do. Certainly not less-than-half the hostages they had a few short months ago, God knows how many have died for lack of medical treatment or getting an Israeli bomb stoving their head in. These hundred-and-something (if that) hostages do not have that value in the context of a war that has already claimed thousands of Israeli lives and tens of thousands of Palestinian lives, in a conflict that has been at fever-pitch, at minimum, for 20 years, more realistically 30, and arguably the last 70 (though I would argue that the phases of the genocide are different enough to be counted as separate attempts at genocide over the full period of Israelās existence).
I just donāt understand how people on here are coming to this conclusion. I canāt even say itās wishful thinking, unless imaginations on here regarding what they wish for are severely limited. It reminds me of when my grandfather would read a news article, immediately come to an impulsive conclusion, and then refuse to change it for any reason. āHostages are invaluableā is a gut reaction from people who live largely in the West, in lands at peace, by actors who make much more limited demands, and by governments which give more of a damn about PR than the fucking Israelis. And fuck, man, even then - after 9/11, how long did the US go with āNo negotiations with terroristsā? Do you think Israeli resolve to finish up their genocide is less than the post-9/11 paranoia and rage in the US?
I really donāt know how the people on Lemmy are approaching this the way they are. It is utterly detached from reality. Itās like showing that you have two-of-a-kind and then going all-in. The hostages are a two-of-a-kind. If the hostages are the key point, Hamas is fucked; and, as much as I despise Hamas, at this moment in time that also means Palestine is fucked.
Okay attitudes towards the hostages can be unrealistic, but I think youāre missing a few key points.
First of all, the hostages arenāt meant to prevent Israel from completing its genocide. Thatās just not the reality on the ground. Theyāre meant to pull the negotiations in Hamasās favor. What I meant by āto prevent Israel from turning Gaza into beachfront propertyā was āso the eventual ceasefire agreement doesnāt have Gaza becoming beachfront property as part of itā. Again, āas part of the ceasefire agreementā. The only thing the hostages are doing now is losing Netanyahu face at home; Iām 100% aware that theyāre not holding back the IDF (Hannibal directive anyone?). That said, they have been a central part of negotiation between Hamas and Israel. Theyāre not the end all be all of genocide enders, but theyāre very much valuable because the Israeli government canāt sacrifice Israeli civiliansā lives for a war half the population agrees doesnāt have a clearly defined goal. Or, well, they can, but the protests a few days ago show why thatās a bad idea.
Hamas already released 150 hostages once just to acquire a four-day ceasefire.
Correction: So technically it was a week but that aside, the idea was for a pause that would become āsomething more enduringā in Bidenās words. It didnāt work and thatās why Hamas is now not accepting anything less than a permanent ceasefire. I doubt they went into the deal expecting that itād end in a week with no progress.
Do you think Israeli resolve to finish up their genocide is less than the post-9/11 paranoia and rage in the US?
In a way, yes. Again, remember the protests from a few days ago. The Israeli public is pissed that the hostages arenāt coming back home. This is half the reason theyāre opposing the war over there. Meanwhile the genocide, while definitely having their blessing, is a more top-down affair. Could be me misreading the situation, but it seems to me like Israelis are more invested in the hostagesā safe return than in this particular genocide. At least enough of them are that people are calling on Netanyahu to accept the ceasefire deal.
The hostages alone wonāt save Gaza, but their existence or lack thereof will and has had a large effect on negotiations, and itās natural to think it will have more when Israel is more serious about trying to end the fighting (which will happen eventually; they canāt go on like this forever (hopefully)).
Theyāre not the end all be all of genocide enders, but theyāre very much valuable because the Israeli government canāt sacrifice Israeli civiliansā lives for a war half the population agrees doesnāt have a clearly defined goal. Or, well, they can, but the protests a few days ago show why thatās a bad idea.
The protests are out of frustration with the government not doing more to return the hostages - but negotiation isnāt the only way to return the hostages. Force is also an option - and judging both by Israelās previous actions and the invasion of Rafah, seems to be the Israeli governmentās chosen route. And, purely strategically, it would be hard to say itās the wrong decision.
Correction: So technically it was a week but that aside, the idea was for a pause that would become āsomething more enduringā in Bidenās words. It didnāt work and thatās why Hamas is now not accepting anything less than a permanent ceasefire. I doubt they went into the deal expecting that itād end in a week with no progress.
The idea that the pause would become more enduring was wishful thinking after it was agreed to, and by Biden, not the parties involved, who needed to seem like he was trying.
and itās natural to think it will have more when Israel is more serious about trying to end the fighting (which will happen eventually; they canāt go on like this forever (hopefully)).
Thatās the thing - they donāt need to go on forever. Gaza is almost entirely occupied now. Once Rafah is under Israeli control, where more in Gaza can offer serious resistance? Fuck, man, theyāre already building massive camps to āmoveā the population to. Where is Hamas going to operate, to keep these hostages when that happens? And if Israel kills half of the hostages in the process of rescuing them, do you think that will lose Netanyahu any supporters who arenāt already against him? On the contrary, theyāll spin it as āLook at what the terrorists made us do!ā, and if the Israeli left doesnāt swallow it, the centre almot certainly will.
Theyāre not nearly valuable enough to call for a permanant ceasefire. Honestly, Iād say Iām surprised that a 40 day ceasefire is on the table for them - not now, with so little left to occupy - except that I donāt believe the Israeli offer is in good faith. Their value was never extremely high - half of it was spent earlier - and their value is reduced with every Hamas-controlled location that is overrun. Realistically, theyāre not worth a permanant ceasefire to Israel, protests or not.
So youāre making good points generally, but the protests Iām referring to clearly demanded a ceasefire so the hostages can return. They explicitly said that they wanted Netanyahu to make a ceasefire agreement and return the hostages.
Israeli society, already working on some 30+ (or 70+ depending on how you count it) years of dehumanization of Palestinians, has been rocked into a frenzy by the fear created by October 7, and by the abhorrent self-censorship of their own media on the subject of the attacks on Gaza. A large proportion of them would still be upset if it was a āpermanentā ceasefire, and very few would be upset if their relatives were retrieved by force rather than by negotiation. Most of them are desperate for their families back, and to feel safe from the prospect being held captive. As I said - there are more ways than negotiation to achieve this.
Thank you for being willing to discuss this. Oftentimes Iām frustrated by running up a brick wall of principles. Itās not that theyāre bad principles, but Iām generally interested inā¦ well, as Bismarck described politics, āthe art of the possible, the attainable, the second-bestā.
Israeli society, already working on some 30+ (or 70+ depending on how you count it) years of dehumanization of Palestinians,
Yeah make that a hundred.
A large proportion of them would still be upset if it was a āpermanentā ceasefire,
The protesters are actually calling for a ceasefire and have been for a while so at least itās not as one-sided as you seem to think. No idea about the ratios though, so feel free to drop them if youāve seen them.
As I said - there are more ways than negotiation to achieve this.
Yes, but none will actually work. How many hostages has Israel retrieved outside of negotiations? From a purely strategic point of view force is not working if your goal is to retrieve the hostages (which we know itās not). Israelis arenāt upset because the IDF is attempting to retrieve the hostages using force; theyāre upset because force canāt work without sacrificing a significant fraction of those hostages as both we and the Israeli public have learned in the past few months.
Itās not very good leverage, considering that Israel is ready to finish up its genocide regardless.
The fact that the Israeli government is acting in bad faith and doesnāt actually care about the hostages doesnāt mean that the Israeli people donāt care.
The fact that people who arenāt genocidal maniacs desperately want the hostages to be freed means that getting them back would be a huge get for the Israeli government, worth many times more than a temporary truce is.
Okay, but leverage is typically supposed to be against the one youāre negotiating or dealing with, and Hamas is quite clearly up against the Israeli government at this point in time.
I donāt see how that follows. The Israeli government is quite clear in its goals - it has killed hostages on its own initiative. It cares only insofar as it would look bad to not negotiate for hostage a release.
A ceasefire is far more important to Hamas than Israel. Israel wants to keep hammering Gaza. If the negotiations fail, then the answer isnāt āWell, now we can use our leverage!ā, itās āFuck, our only leverage has gotten us literally nothingā.
Which is basically what Israel is offering. Theyāre asking for the political points from getting the hostages back and will invade and/or bomb the shit out of Rafah no matter what.
Or to simplify: giving everything in exchange for basically nothing is a bad deal. Hamas knows it, the Israeli government knows it and the NYT knows it.
The latter two are just gaslighting people about it to pretend that the Israeli government is being anything approaching reasonable.
Theyāre offering a 40-day ceasefire, which would be more beneficial to Hamas than to Israel. Itās not inherently ridiculous for Hamas to accept in exchange for the hostages. The issue is that Israel isnāt serious, and will dance around with terms so they can claim Hamas rejected it again.
But itās not everything. The hostages are minor at most, and leverage unutilized is as worthless as not having leverage at all. Furthermore, all negotiations are done by the relative positions of the negotiators - if Hamas wants to hold out for a better deal, thatās certainly a valid strategic decision. But it must also be recognized that it is quite probably long odds since Israel is overwhelmingly in the better position at this point in time.
Once Rafah is taken, this whole miserable affair is going to wind up. And almost certainly not in a good way.
Speaking PURELY from a strategic perspective, what do you think the hostages CAN be traded for? What is something that is realistic for the Israeli government to offer other than a temporary ceasefire? Knowing the Israeli governmentās current position and goals? Not āWhat would be MORAL for them to offerā, what, realistically, can Hamas get out of the Israeli government with these hostages that would be more useful than a 40-day ceasefire and the release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners?
But neither the article nor the headline have the tone youāre talking about.
What are you basing that assumption on?
Edit: come to think of it, the opposite is very much the case: a 40 day pause will take the international pressure off Israel long enough that the media moves onto other things. Meanwhile, Palestinians are just as dead 40 days later but with a fraction of people still paying attention.
Yeah it is. Itās basically the equivalent of being broke and jobless and selling your house for $5000. Sure, you can pay rent for a while with the $5000, but itās much less than the house is worth and when the moneyās spent, youāre homeless AND just as penniless as you started out.
Only instead of a house, itās tens if not hundreds of thousands in civilian lives.
Itās both: if they were serious, they wouldnāt make such a ridiculously bad offer.
I wouldnāt on that persisting, though, as public opinion both domestically and internationally is increasingly worsening for the Israeli government as sympathy for their victims grow and outrage at the many atrocities spreads.
Nope. The Israeli government wonāt stop at that.
Because the article and headline are muddling the waters after Israel has already (almost immediately) rejected the deal. Gaslighting isnāt always about tone.
Too many factors to count. If you really want to get into a discussion about why Hamas benefits from a ceasefire more than Israel, we can - but I would prefer to keep this conversation on the issue of the negotiations as a whole.
If nothing else - the fact that Hamas has been trying to get a ceasefire deal out of the hostages and signalled a conditional willingness to accept a temporary ceasefire (though not on terms Israel finds acceptable) suggests very strongly that Hamas sees a ceasefire as beneficial to them.
Okay. So you donāt sell the house. The house is foreclosed on. You get nothing.
What is the benefit?
Take a look at the Israeli government. Not the concept of Israel as a rational (if amoral) world actor. Take a look at who is making the decisions right now, and how their grip on power is still firm both by legal means (the Knesset, short of snap elections, will not be replaced anytime soon) and by manipulation of Israeli popular opinion (the majority of Israelis still overwhelmingly get their news from Israeli sources, which have engaged in a monstrous amount of self-censorship regarding the genocide in Gaza after Oct 7).
With that in mind, what, in the next few months, do you expect public opinion in foreign countries to do to shift those decision-makers? Realistically speaking?
You misunderstand. When I say āWind upā, I donāt mean āThe genocide stopsā. I mean āThe genocide rapidly reaches completion.ā Once Rafah is taken, Israeli occupation of the Gaza strip is total once more, and theyāve already got massive āhumanitarianā camps to use as an excuse to starve and deport Palestinians.
Israel hasnāt formally rejected the terms yet. It could very well just be posturing, especially since Israel sent negotiators back to Egypt after the announcement of Hamasās acceptance of the new deal. I think more likely itās stalling for time, but itās far from certain.
I mean yes and no. Have you seen the protests in Israel? Yeah those arenāt because the Israeli public suddenly cares about human rights; theyāre equal parts because Netanyahu wants to get rid of democracy in Israel and because of his disregard for the hostagesā lives in his assault on Gaza, so they are doing their job. And letās remember that their real role hasnāt come yet; these hostages are there for after the āwarā ends because without any hostages Israel will be turning Gaza into beachfront real estate.
How many hostages have the IDF killed already? Do you really think that if turning Gaza into beachfront real estate and the handful of hostages that are left will be enough to stay the Israeli far-right? Hamas already released 150 hostages once just to acquire a four-day ceasefire. You really think that the hostages are being held for when the āwarā ends? Do you really think theyāre that valuable? If you were in Israelās position, with Israelās goals and morality, would you stop for the hostages? When the āwarā ends, the IDF will either have taken them or buried them under the rubble like every other civilian in the strip.
The hostages are not the trump card people here seem to think they are, and considering Hamasās negotiating attitude towards them, they are far more aware of that than people here, who seem to want to think that the hostages are the major thing ākeepingā Israel from completing their genocide, when the fact is that theyāre well on their way, as though the hostages were not an issue at all. The only concession that was realistic was the release of prisoners and a temporary ceasefire; the idea that Israel, which has yearned for this genocide for decades, will suddenly stop for hostages theyāve already shot and bombed to death, and an unknown amount of whom are already dead, is insane.
Hostages do not have the value people here are telling themselves they do. Certainly not less-than-half the hostages they had a few short months ago, God knows how many have died for lack of medical treatment or getting an Israeli bomb stoving their head in. These hundred-and-something (if that) hostages do not have that value in the context of a war that has already claimed thousands of Israeli lives and tens of thousands of Palestinian lives, in a conflict that has been at fever-pitch, at minimum, for 20 years, more realistically 30, and arguably the last 70 (though I would argue that the phases of the genocide are different enough to be counted as separate attempts at genocide over the full period of Israelās existence).
I just donāt understand how people on here are coming to this conclusion. I canāt even say itās wishful thinking, unless imaginations on here regarding what they wish for are severely limited. It reminds me of when my grandfather would read a news article, immediately come to an impulsive conclusion, and then refuse to change it for any reason. āHostages are invaluableā is a gut reaction from people who live largely in the West, in lands at peace, by actors who make much more limited demands, and by governments which give more of a damn about PR than the fucking Israelis. And fuck, man, even then - after 9/11, how long did the US go with āNo negotiations with terroristsā? Do you think Israeli resolve to finish up their genocide is less than the post-9/11 paranoia and rage in the US?
I really donāt know how the people on Lemmy are approaching this the way they are. It is utterly detached from reality. Itās like showing that you have two-of-a-kind and then going all-in. The hostages are a two-of-a-kind. If the hostages are the key point, Hamas is fucked; and, as much as I despise Hamas, at this moment in time that also means Palestine is fucked.
Okay attitudes towards the hostages can be unrealistic, but I think youāre missing a few key points.
First of all, the hostages arenāt meant to prevent Israel from completing its genocide. Thatās just not the reality on the ground. Theyāre meant to pull the negotiations in Hamasās favor. What I meant by āto prevent Israel from turning Gaza into beachfront propertyā was āso the eventual ceasefire agreement doesnāt have Gaza becoming beachfront property as part of itā. Again, āas part of the ceasefire agreementā. The only thing the hostages are doing now is losing Netanyahu face at home; Iām 100% aware that theyāre not holding back the IDF (Hannibal directive anyone?). That said, they have been a central part of negotiation between Hamas and Israel. Theyāre not the end all be all of genocide enders, but theyāre very much valuable because the Israeli government canāt sacrifice Israeli civiliansā lives for a war half the population agrees doesnāt have a clearly defined goal. Or, well, they can, but the protests a few days ago show why thatās a bad idea.
Correction: So technically it was a week but that aside, the idea was for a pause that would become āsomething more enduringā in Bidenās words. It didnāt work and thatās why Hamas is now not accepting anything less than a permanent ceasefire. I doubt they went into the deal expecting that itād end in a week with no progress.
In a way, yes. Again, remember the protests from a few days ago. The Israeli public is pissed that the hostages arenāt coming back home. This is half the reason theyāre opposing the war over there. Meanwhile the genocide, while definitely having their blessing, is a more top-down affair. Could be me misreading the situation, but it seems to me like Israelis are more invested in the hostagesā safe return than in this particular genocide. At least enough of them are that people are calling on Netanyahu to accept the ceasefire deal.
The hostages alone wonāt save Gaza, but their existence or lack thereof will and has had a large effect on negotiations, and itās natural to think it will have more when Israel is more serious about trying to end the fighting (which will happen eventually; they canāt go on like this forever (hopefully)).
The protests are out of frustration with the government not doing more to return the hostages - but negotiation isnāt the only way to return the hostages. Force is also an option - and judging both by Israelās previous actions and the invasion of Rafah, seems to be the Israeli governmentās chosen route. And, purely strategically, it would be hard to say itās the wrong decision.
The idea that the pause would become more enduring was wishful thinking after it was agreed to, and by Biden, not the parties involved, who needed to seem like he was trying.
Thatās the thing - they donāt need to go on forever. Gaza is almost entirely occupied now. Once Rafah is under Israeli control, where more in Gaza can offer serious resistance? Fuck, man, theyāre already building massive camps to āmoveā the population to. Where is Hamas going to operate, to keep these hostages when that happens? And if Israel kills half of the hostages in the process of rescuing them, do you think that will lose Netanyahu any supporters who arenāt already against him? On the contrary, theyāll spin it as āLook at what the terrorists made us do!ā, and if the Israeli left doesnāt swallow it, the centre almot certainly will.
Theyāre not nearly valuable enough to call for a permanant ceasefire. Honestly, Iād say Iām surprised that a 40 day ceasefire is on the table for them - not now, with so little left to occupy - except that I donāt believe the Israeli offer is in good faith. Their value was never extremely high - half of it was spent earlier - and their value is reduced with every Hamas-controlled location that is overrun. Realistically, theyāre not worth a permanant ceasefire to Israel, protests or not.
So youāre making good points generally, but the protests Iām referring to clearly demanded a ceasefire so the hostages can return. They explicitly said that they wanted Netanyahu to make a ceasefire agreement and return the hostages.
Israeli society, already working on some 30+ (or 70+ depending on how you count it) years of dehumanization of Palestinians, has been rocked into a frenzy by the fear created by October 7, and by the abhorrent self-censorship of their own media on the subject of the attacks on Gaza. A large proportion of them would still be upset if it was a āpermanentā ceasefire, and very few would be upset if their relatives were retrieved by force rather than by negotiation. Most of them are desperate for their families back, and to feel safe from the prospect being held captive. As I said - there are more ways than negotiation to achieve this.
Thank you for being willing to discuss this. Oftentimes Iām frustrated by running up a brick wall of principles. Itās not that theyāre bad principles, but Iām generally interested inā¦ well, as Bismarck described politics, āthe art of the possible, the attainable, the second-bestā.
Yeah make that a hundred.
The protesters are actually calling for a ceasefire and have been for a while so at least itās not as one-sided as you seem to think. No idea about the ratios though, so feel free to drop them if youāve seen them.
Yes, but none will actually work. How many hostages has Israel retrieved outside of negotiations? From a purely strategic point of view force is not working if your goal is to retrieve the hostages (which we know itās not). Israelis arenāt upset because the IDF is attempting to retrieve the hostages using force; theyāre upset because force canāt work without sacrificing a significant fraction of those hostages as both we and the Israeli public have learned in the past few months.