Ceasefire Is Not The End
by Jonathan Kuttab
It looks as if there will finally be a ceasefire and hostage deal, set to begin this Sunday.
Every decent person in the world, I am sure, is breathing a sigh of relief at the cessation—at least temporarily—of the horrible nightmare in Gaza.
This nightmare has been torturing us daily with news of 50-100 new victims every single day and our incapacity to do anything to truly stop it, in addition to the suffering of the captives on both sides, and of the entire Gazan population living under siege and bombardment.
Apparently, the agreement is to be achieved in three stages. In the first stage, Hamas will release 33 hostages (both alive and dead) and Israel will release some prisoners and suspend bombing for 42 days, while arrangements are made for the next two phases. The population of Northern Gaza will be permitted to return to their destroyed homes and humanitarian aid allowed to enter.
Yet, despite any momentary relief we may be feeling, it is crucial to highlight a number of important realities:
It is now clear that the basic terms of the deal are almost identical to the terms provided in the deal proposed last May. No significant changes have been made, so the momentous suffering and loss since that time seem especially unnecessary and tragic.
It is also clear that the primary obstacles to a ceasefire have not resulted from the intransigence of Hamas, but from the deliberate undermining of the deal by Israeli leadership. Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smootrich are openly taking credit for repeatedly sabotaging the deal in the past and continue to threaten to withdraw from the Netanyahu government if it goes forward.
In Israel, contrary to the false protestations and lies of Secretary of State Blinken, it is well-known and acknowledged that resistance from the Israeli right wing and the desire of Netanyahu to maintain his government has always been the key obstacle to the signing of a deal.
It is indeed worrying that the first “stage” of the deal may very well be the last and that movement to the next stages and towards a true, permanent ceasefire is not assured. Those elements in Israel who sabotaged this deal in the past may be still actively seeking opportunities to prolonge the killing, bombing campains, forced starvation, and genocide, after securing the release of some or all of the hostages.
While we do not know the extent to which Trump’s threats of US pressure had to do with the “breakthrough,” or how much is just political theatre, the consensus among most Israeli analysts I hear indicates that Israel changed its mind and agreed to this deal directly as a result of US pressure.
Haaretz even carried a story that Trump’s representative, Steve Witcoff, wanted to meet with Netanyahu regarding the ceasefire/hostage deal. When informed that Natanyahu could not meet him because of the Shabbat, Witcoff retorted that “the Shabbat was of no interest to him.” The meeting did indeed take place, and, after a “tense interaction” with Netanyahu, an agreement was reached. Past claims by the Biden administration that it could not pressure Israel or force its decisions seem to be false.
Additional realities to highlight include the following:
There seems to be no clear linkage between the first and remaining stages in the deal, which leaves it possible that “fighting” will resume after the 42-day pause and the genocide will continue. As with the Oslo Agreement, there are no enforcement mechanisms or consequences for the Israelis if they fail to live up to the agreements.
The entire deal, even if all stages are agreed upon and implemented faithfully, still leaves a number of important questions unanswered: the mechanism for ruling the Gaza Strip after the deal, access to and the distribution of food, water, and other humanitarian assistance, the extent of Israeli withdrawal, and whether any forces other than Hamas will be able to govern the civilian affairs of Gaza. Lifting the siege and allowing free movement in and out of Gaza may not even be on the table.
In all cases, the underlying problem continues to be unaddressed. So long as the basic requirements of peace, equality and justice are not even addressed, such temporary security arrangements will always be inadequate, and the temptation to resort to power and violence remains. This is why it is important for us to continue working for a just peace, to insist on respecting moral and legal principles, regardless of whether a deal is reached or breached.
Meanwhile, we still have to address the following questions:
Will the siege be lifted so that Gazans can begin the process of rebuilding their hospitals, schools, universities, homes and lives?
Who will supply the food, water, medicines, electricity, and building materials needed to meet the immediate needs of the population for subsistence and shelter, as well as the monumental task of rebuilding what was destroyed? Who will provide and maintain basic public services, not to mention law and order, in the immediate future?
Will international journalists be allowed into Gaza to describe in their “authoritative” (read: Western) reporting what actually has been taking place in the last year or so?
Will the criminals responsible for genocide and war crimes be brought to justice?
Finally, what about the West Bank? Should the ceasefire take effect in Gaza, we must continue to keep our eyes on the West Bank, on the settlements and the settlers, on the occupying army and the apartheid regime, on the prisoners, and on Palestinian leadership.
Failing to address these issues will only increase the violence.
In all cases, our work for peace and justice must go on. We continue to proclaim violence is not the answer. It will never provide Palestinians with the desired liberation nor Israelis their vaunted security. Violence not only includes guns and bombs but also bulldozers, walls, checkpoints, and all of the oppressive structures that make up Israeli apartheid, such as occupation, siege, and the denial of freedom.
We also reiterate that should violence erupt anyway, civilians must be spared as much as possible from the ravages of war. Measures which target civilians are never legitimate. That is why the taking of civilian (as opposed to military) hostages was never legitimate—and roundly condemned—yet neither are restrictions on access to food, water, medicine and fuel. Similarly, the targeting of hospitals, schools, bakeries, and other civilian structures is never legitimate.
Universal human rights and international law must always be respected. Every effort should be made to seek peaceful methods for resolving disputes and nonviolent means for resisting oppression. Promoting such universal values and respect for international institutions and principles is an important value for all of us, not only those caught up in conflict. The news of this ceasefire/hostage deal may indeed be very welcome, but it is hardly the end of the road.