Recent ceasefire talks in Cairo concerning Gaza have stalled, with Hamas rejecting Israel’s extension proposal. The negotiations have yet to produce a clear path for the second phase, which would mandate a full Israeli withdrawal. Political ramifications for Israel’s Prime Minister are a concern, while proposals regarding Gaza’s governance and reconstruction continue to evolve amid regional discussions.
Efforts to secure a lasting ceasefire in Gaza faced significant challenges in Cairo as of Saturday. Negotiations among various delegations, including representatives from Hamas, Qatar, and Egypt, alongside U.S. and Israeli officials, reached a standstill. Hamas reportedly rejected Israel’s proposal to extend the initial ceasefire phase, which focused on hostages’ release, increased aid, and a limited military withdrawal, as insufficient to meet the emerging needs for long-term peace and stability.
The second phase of the ceasefire would require a more comprehensive Israeli withdrawal, particularly from the Philadelphi corridor on the Gaza-Egypt border. While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has labeled the control of this area a strategic imperative, he previously accepted a gradual withdrawal by March 9, as part of the conditions discussed. However, a complete withdrawal poses risks to his right-wing coalition, potentially leading to new elections.
Political analysts suggest that Netanyahu may have viewed the ceasefire as a means to appease external pressures, particularly from former U.S. President Donald Trump, believing it would not progress to a second phase. Conversely, Trump’s Middle East special envoy, Steve Witkoff, emphasizes the necessity of implementing such a phase to secure the release of remaining hostages.
Discussions continued to falter regarding control of Gaza post-war, with contrasting proposals emerging, including Trump’s controversial suggestion that the U.S. “own” Gaza, promoting radical demographic changes. Meanwhile, Israel’s military presented solutions for managing aid supplies in Gaza, enhancing its operational control over the region’s humanitarian needs.
Upcoming meetings of the Arab League are set to examine an Egyptian-led reconstruction approach that envisions temporary housing solutions for displaced Gazans as rebuilding efforts begin. However, the struggle to identify a credible governing body for Gaza persists. Opposition leader Yair Lapid proposed Egypt temporarily govern Gaza for a defined period, suggesting this would facilitate stability and eventual Palestinian self-governance.
In conclusion, the negotiations for a ceasefire in Gaza have encountered significant roadblocks, primarily due to disputes over terms and governance. The need for an effective and credible authority in Gaza remains paramount, alongside an urgent response to the humanitarian crisis. The proposals to stabilize Gaza may hinge on Egypt’s involvement, highlighting the complexity of the geopolitical dynamics in play.
Original Source: www.theguardian.com
