Hamas shows willingness to negotiate as Israeli hawks resist

Hamas signals a ceasefire plan while Israeli hawks fight it and hostage families press for a full agreement.

Hardline ministers push for total victory as hostages families demand accord

Hamas told mediators it accepted a proposal that would pause fighting for 60 days and release 10 living hostages in exchange for 150 Palestinian prisoners, with bodies of slain captives also to be returned. The talks, taking place in Cairo with Egyptian mediation and backing from Qatar and the United States, aim to secure a broader deal before Israel moves on to Gaza City. Mediators describe the proposal as a potential first step toward a wider ceasefire and a longer-term framework.

Within Israel, the position is deeply divided. Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir rejected any partial agreement, insisting that Israel must continue its effort against Hamas and warning that the war cannot be compromised. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich argued the group is under pressure because of Israel’s planned assault on Gaza City, and warned against giving Hamas a lifeline. Opposition leader Benny Gantz urged the government to act decisively, saying there is broad public support for bringing the hostages home. Haredi parties in the coalition expressed support for a hostage release, while Defense Minister Israel Katz cautioned that Hamas may be engaging in talks out of fear of an offensive. The Hostages and Missing Families Forum called for continuous negotiations and warned against torpedoing any deal. Netanyahu signaled readiness to press ahead with the planned operation, while also noting that Israel remains focused on a comprehensive settlement that includes all hostages and security guarantees.

The episode exposes a tension at the heart of modern war politics: the urge for a quick, tangible outcome versus the risk of overcommitting to a deal that could backfire if Hamas gains time or international standing. The loudest voices in the coalition frame any partial agreement as a fatal error, betting on deterrence through force. Yet mediators frame a staged path — a pause now, broader talks later — as a pragmatic route to de-escalation. The clash of perspectives risks a standoff that could delay action and frustrate families who demand continuous engagement. In the wider context, regional mediators hope a measured step could preserve credibility with international partners while avoiding a complete collapse of negotiations. The coming days will test whether political lines, not soldiers on the ground, decide the fate of hostages and civilians in Gaza.

Highlights

The trajectory of talks will reshape both the security calculus and the political narrative at home.