The picture shows the Palestinian-Israeli conflict
In this issue, the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations broke down, and the next stage of the battle began.
In recent months, there has been little progress in the ceasefire talks between Kazakhstan and Israel. On May 4, the Hamas delegation traveled to Cairo to launch a new round of negotiations with brokers such as Egypt and Qatar, which also ended in failure.
On May 6, Hamas issued a statement expressing its agreement with the ceasefire proposed by Qatar and other mediators. The program is divided into 3 phases. In the first phase, the two sides exchanged some hostages, and Hamas expressed its willingness to release 33 hostages, while the Israeli side withdrew part of its troops. In the second phase, the two sides continued to release hostages, and Israeli troops continued to withdraw, restoring calm in Gaza. In the third phase, the parties will release all hostages, achieve sustainable calm and rebuild Gaza under United Nations supervision.
Pictured is Hamas leader Haniyeh
Hamas agreed to a ceasefire plan, which kicked the ball to Israel's side, and whether the Palestinian-Israeli conflict can end depends on whether the Israeli government nods. After waiting around the world, the Israeli side finally made a statement on May 9, and an Israeli official said that the previous ceasefire talks in Cairo had broken down. In other words, Hamas agreed to a ceasefire, but Israel refused.
The failure of the ceasefire negotiations was also expected, and on the same day that Hamas announced its agreement to the cease-fire agreement, Israel announced its operational plan to attack Rafah. Hamas said ceasefire talks would be unlikely to succeed as long as Israel insisted on continuing its military operations.
The specific reasons for the failure of the ceasefire in Gaza are actually very complex, first of all, it can be seen from the fact that Israel is willing to negotiate with Hamas, Israel has a certain willingness to ceasefire, otherwise it would not sit at the negotiating table. On April 29, Blinken, who was visiting Saudi Arabia at the time, spoke out the terms of Israel's ceasefire, which were roughly divided into two steps.
First, Hamas released between 20 and 33 Israeli hostages in a matter of weeks, and the Israeli army temporarily ceasefired, while the Palestinian hostages were released. Hamas then released the remaining hostages and handed over the bodies of the dead to Israel, which freed more Palestinians and restored sustainable calm in Gaza.
The picture shows Israeli troops in Gaza
It is not difficult to see that there is basically no big difference between Israel's conditions and Hamas's agreed terms, both of which are hostages exchanged between the two sides and then a ceasefire is achieved. However, there is one difference, that is, the plan proposed by the Israeli side does not include a full withdrawal of troops. Perhaps this is one of the reasons why the ceasefire talks between the two sides failed.
In fact, Israel has also made concessions to the terms of the ceasefire, and at the beginning of the conflict, Israel's armistice was conditional on Hamas surrendering all its weapons and unconditionally surrendering all hostages. By the end of last year, Israel's conditions had shifted to the demilitarization of Hamas, the demilitarization of Gaza, and the deradicalization of Palestine.
And now, Israel's conditions are no longer for Hamas to surrender or lay down its arms. This shows that Netanyahu is also feeling great pressure to make concessions on the terms of the ceasefire with various accusations from the international community and within Israel.
So the question is, if Israel is willing to ceasefire, why did the negotiations break down?
From the perspective of the overall background, the development of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is no longer just a simple contradiction between the Palestinians and the Jews, but behind it is the competition of interests between Middle Eastern countries and the United States and the West, involving many countries, the United States, Iran and other Middle Eastern countries are fiercely competing openly and covertly.
Pictured is Netanyahu
On a small level, Israel still wants to end the war and force Hamas to continue to make concessions through strong military pressure, which is why Israel insists on attacking Rafah. For Netanyahu, this may be the best way to do it right now. While an attack on Rafah is likely to escalate the situation and increase the pressure on Israel, Hamas will also feel the pressure.
At the same time, neither the United States, behind Israel, nor Iran, behind Hamas, wants the situation to escalate. Israel's attack on Rafah is also putting pressure on Iran and the United States. When the situation inevitably escalates, the United States and Iran will certainly stand up to cool the situation, and at that time, Israel will have more leverage. What is tested here is the ability of all parties to resist pressure, and whoever can carry it to the end will be able to grasp the initiative.
However, there is also a lot of risk in doing so, as if two people are fighting on a tightrope, and whoever is afraid first loses.
In the event of a miscalculation or loss of control, escalation of the situation is inevitable, and Israel's move can be said to be a risky move.
The picture shows a tank driving into Rafa
According to the Israeli side, after the breakdown of ceasefire talks, the Israeli army will continue to carry out military operations in Rafah. After the wartime Cabinet adopted the decision to attack Rafah on 6 May, Israeli forces bombed Rafah on the night of the same day and in the early morning of 7 May, killing at least 20 people. At the same time, Israeli ground forces began to assemble at the Rafah crossing, and after heavy fighting with Hamas, they occupied the Gaza side of the crossing. On May 8, the Israeli army issued a statement saying that it had killed 30 Hamas fighters in Rafah.
Rafah is a very densely populated area, and the Israeli army's actions here will inevitably cause a large number of civilian casualties, and the international community has always been firmly opposed, and the United States has also suspended its aid to Israel's weapons of mass destruction. At the same time, armed groups in the Middle East have taken action, with Allah guerrillas firing missiles and drones at Israeli military camps in northern Gaza on May 8.
Since the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Iran has organized a number of armed groups to participate in the war, creating tremendous strategic pressure on the United States and Israel. Lebanese Allah, Iraqi Shiite militias, and Yemeni Houthis are fighting on multiple fronts at the same time, harassing and containing the United States and Israel. According to publicly available information, Israel has deployed 3 to 4 divisions along the Lebanese-Israeli border. The "Eisenhower" aircraft carrier deployed by the United States in the Red Sea region has not left for more than four months, and these are all forces that have been pinned down, so that the forces of Israel and the United States have been greatly dispersed.
Pictured is Iranian President Raisi
It can be seen from this that under this set of Iranian strategic system, a certain deterrent has been formed against the United States and Israel, although the strength of these armed organizations is not strong, but they are all in a scattered situation, blooming in all directions, the United States and Israel want to strike, they can only pull out one by one, but when they attack one of them, the other organizations will stand up and form a situation of encirclement, and it is not easy for the United States and Israel to break the situation.
As the saying goes: "Complexity is a nature of the game. "It will not be easy for Iran to "fight with the United States and Israel for a long time" without breaking. How to grasp the scale, maintain the strength of deterrence, and make good use of the "arc of resistance" requires caution and judging the situation. At present, the possibility of a larger-scale conflict between the two sides still exists, and the future game will be more difficult, which will test the strategic wisdom of all parties even more.