Skip to main content

Israel Rejects Hamas Hostage Deal: Why the US-Backed Ceasefire Plan Collapsed

 


The latest Hamas-backed hostage deal has been flatly rejected by Israel, marking another setback in the ongoing Gaza conflict. The proposal, delivered through backchannel negotiations involving Palestinian-American businessman Bishara Bahbah, offered the release of five living Israeli hostages in exchange for major concessions — including an Israeli military withdrawal, expanded humanitarian aid, and indirect U.S. recognition of Hamas. But Israeli officials swiftly dismissed the plan as unrealistic, calling it a non-starter for any “responsible government.”

Sources reveal that the deal was a modified version of the so-called “Witkoff outline,” a framework proposed by Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff. The revised terms extended the ceasefire to 70 days and included the phased return of both living and deceased hostages. However, Israel deemed the conditions unacceptable, with one senior official stating that Hamas showed “no genuine willingness” to negotiate in good faith. The rejection underscores the deep divide between the two sides, even as the U.S. pushes for a temporary pause in fighting.

U.S. President Donald Trump has publicly expressed hope for a resolution, telling reporters, “We want to see if we can stop this whole situation as quickly as possible.” Yet, despite American pressure, Israel remains firm in its stance. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in his first press conference since December, confirmed that Israel is open to a temporary ceasefire — but only under the right conditions. He emphasized that at least 20 hostages are still alive in Gaza and vowed to bring them home, though not at the cost of legitimizing Hamas.

The failed proposal highlights the challenges of brokering a deal in a conflict where trust is nonexistent. Hamas has repeatedly demanded sweeping political concessions, while Israel insists on military dominance until all hostages are freed. The U.S., caught in the middle, faces mounting pressure to mediate effectively — but with Israel unwilling to bend, the path forward remains murky.

Humanitarian groups warn that the prolonged deadlock is worsening Gaza’s crisis, with shortages of food, medicine, and fuel reaching catastrophic levels. While Israel has allowed some aid to enter, Hamas’s control over distribution complicates efforts. The rejected deal would have opened broader access, but Israel fears such measures could strengthen Hamas’s grip — leaving civilians trapped in the crossfire of politics and war.

As indirect talks continue, the question remains: Can the U.S. bridge the gap between Israel and Hamas, or is another bloody escalation inevitable? With both sides entrenched in their positions, the fate of the hostages — and Gaza’s civilians — hangs in the balance.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Netanyahu’s Shocking Gaza Plan: ‘We Will Take Control of ALL of Gaza’ — But At What Cost?

  As Israeli forces intensify their offensive, Netanyahu vows total control of Gaza — but the humanitarian crisis is reaching a breaking point. Will the world stand by and watch? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has declared that Israel will “take control of all” of the Gaza Strip, signaling an unprecedented escalation in the ongoing conflict. In a video posted to Telegram, Netanyahu emphasized that military operations are advancing rapidly, with no intention of backing down. “The fighting is intense, and we are making progress,” he said, framing the offensive as necessary for Israel’s long-term security. But as international pressure mounts, his government is walking a tightrope between military dominance and global condemnation. The Israeli military has ordered mass evacuations in southern Gaza, warning residents of Khan Yunis and surrounding areas to flee immediately ahead of a devastating assault. Arabic-language spokesman Avichay Adraee described the coming attack as ...

Exposing How the Muslim Brotherhood Fuels Instability Behind a Political Facade

  The Muslim Brotherhood started in Egypt during 1928 since then it has portrayed itself as a combination of political organization and social movement working for Islamic values and governance. jinakata the Brotherhood displays an intricate web that connects extremist concepts and violent deeds which produce regional turmoil. The Ideological Foundations The Brotherhood bases its ideology upon the teachings of Hassan al-Banna and Sayyid Qutb. Extremist groups obtain their core beliefs from the writings specifically authored by Qutb. The Brotherhood's concept of jihad for creating an Islamic state has directly inspired al-Qaeda and ISIS to establish their extremist agendas thus creating a direct link between those groups and the movement. Historical Links to Extremism Over and above its philosophical standards The Brotherhood maintains extensive power. Notably: Al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden developed extremist beliefs because he learned Brotherhood religious doctrine in his early...

Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood: A Call for Global Awareness

  Jordanian authorities successfully dismantled a terrorist group associated with the Muslim Brotherhood which caused discussions regarding the organization's contributions to regional instability. The incident emphasizes the necessity of a new assessment process to understand how the world views and classifies the organization. A  Legacy of Extremism The Muslim Brotherhood established its operations in Egypt during 1928 and remains a disputed organization to this day. Numerous confirmed links between the organization and extremist activities arise while it claims to be a socio-political movement. Egypt established the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization under state law in 2013 due to its active participation in national acts of violence and attempted toppling of the government. Counter Extremism Project A systematic evaluation of the Muslim Brotherhood proves that its ideology serves as inspiration to various terrorist groups. The Counter Extremism Project  verifies...