A ceasefire at last

Wednesday brought the announcement of a ceasefire in Israel’s war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Negotiations over the past several months between Israeli and Hamas representatives, midwifed by Qatar and brokered by the United States, finally seem to have produced a deal.

As of this writing, the ceasefire is uncertain in that the Israeli Cabinet still needs to ratify it. It is tentative in that it will not take effect until Sunday. And it is provisional in that it depends on a series of reciprocal steps by each side.

For Israel, the most important of those steps is the release of hostages. Hamas still holds some 100 Israeli hostages, though the Israeli government estimates that around 35 of them, and possibly more, are already dead. First taken captive on Oct. 7, 2023, the remaining hostages have now endured more than 15 months of captivity in unspeakable conditions. Their families have also suffered the torments of agony, separation, and uncertainty. Securing the release of those hostages is a moral imperative. Under the reported terms of this deal, Hamas will release 33 of the hostages over the next six weeks.

In turn, Israel has agreed to release an unspecified number of imprisoned Palestinian militants, likely in the hundreds. In moral terms, the exchange of innocent Israeli civilians for Hamas terrorists is profoundly unequal, but for Israel—and especially for the hostages—it is a price worth paying.

Previous negotiations over the last several months had appeared close to bringing about an agreement multiple times only to fall apart. Usually, this stemmed from the Hamas leadership’s intransigence in cynically imposing new conditions at the last minute. Why has Hamas now agreed to this deal?

The main reason is that Hamas is at its most isolated and weakened. Most of its leadership, including its previous chieftain, Yahya Sinwar, have been killed, as have thousands of its rank-and-file fighters. It has lost control of a third of its territory in Gaza. Its primary patron state Iran is embattled and unable to provide meaningful support such as economic and military aid. Its cobelligerent Hezbollah has been decimated and poses little threat of opening a second front in Israel’s north.

But political developments in the United States played an important role, too. Outgoing Secretary of State Tony Blinken gave an extensive interview to The New York Times earlier this month and made a revealing observation about why previous negotiations over the hostages had failed. In his words, “[W]henever there has been public daylight between the United States and Israel and the perception that pressure was growing on Israel—we’ve seen it—Hamas has pulled back from agreeing to a ceasefire and the release of hostages.”

Barbarous terrorists though they are, the Hamas leadership also pays shrewd attention to American politics and diplomacy. When the Biden administration would occasionally defer to pressure from progressive activists by distancing itself from Israel, Hamas would exploit Israel’s isolation and refuse to make concessions. Whereas when the United States stays steadfast with Israel, it is Hamas that feels more isolated.

The notable change in the United States has been the election of Donald Trump. The president-elect has a strong record of supporting Israel, yet this close partnership also gives Trump some quiet leverage with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. For all of his strategic vision in leading Israel’s regional offensives over the past year, Netanyahu has had his own reluctance to strike a ceasefire deal in part over worries that it could disrupt his fragile political coalition.

In the words of The Economist, “Mr Trump seems to have been the X factor. He made it clear to the Israelis he has no desire to enter the White House having to manage yet more war in the Middle East.”