More than a year and a half after the start of Operation Iron Swords — launched in response to Hamas’ murderous terror attack on the Israeli communities around Gaza on October 7, 2023 — Israel is now required to decide its preferred course of action about its conduct in the Gaza Strip.
Hamas’ response, delivered on July 24 to the mediators Egypt and Qatar, regarding the latest ceasefire and hostage deal proposal, was predictable in its phrasing. It followed a “yes, but…” approach and was accompanied by demands for amendments and improvements. As a result, it was rejected by Israel and the United States, both of which regarded it as a negative response that did not allow for progress or a breakthrough toward a new agreement. Under these circumstances, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to recall the Israeli delegation from Doha, which had been engaged in talks with Hamas for two and a half weeks.
Nevertheless, despite the delegation’s return, Israel has not made any declarations about ending the negotiations with Hamas. Still, its current stance indicates that significant disagreements exist on core issues, which at present appear irreconcilable. The main point of contention between the sides seems to revolve around Hamas’ demand for a clear Israeli commitment to end the war and for a complete IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip after a 60-day ceasefire, during which ten live hostages held by the terror organization would be returned to Israel.
According to recent media reports, Hamas has also raised several new demands during the latest contacts in Qatar. These focus mainly on the criteria for releasing Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences and others arrested after the October 7 massacre, the expulsion of the humanitarian aid fund GHF, the opening of the Rafah crossing for two-way movement, the return of humanitarian aid shipments via the UN rather than through the fund, a broader IDF withdrawal from parts of Gaza, and a reduction in the buffer security zone between Israel and the Strip.
According to a report in the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, although the Israeli and U.S. delegations have left Doha, the negotiation track remains open. The departure of the delegations is seen partly as a pressure tactic rather than an indication that the talks have ended. It is meant to shift the balance of power in Israel’s favor. According to the same report, Egypt and Qatar do not view the recent developments as a collapse of the negotiations but rather as “a temporary pause that can be resumed,” and assert that the current obstacles are no more complex than those the parties have already overcome in the past.
In this context, it is worth noting that in an interview with CNN on July 27, the American mediator, Brett McGurk, voiced implicit criticism of Hamas, saying that the organization’s approach was to “introduce new details and conditions during the negotiations… We said you can’t do that when people are dying, and we called for a ceasefire during which the remaining issues could be discussed.”
Hundreds of Trucks Still Waiting
In response to mounting pressure from the international community, Israel has begun a large-scale delivery of humanitarian aid to the population in the Gaza Strip, including airdrops. In addition, Israel has opened supply corridors and decided to implement, beginning July 28 at 10:00 a.m., a daily pause in military operations for humanitarian purposes, lasting ten hours in several population centers. The senior Israeli official who announced the move stated that during the aid airdrops, the IDF would ensure safe access to aid centers and that, in his assessment, this could significantly increase the amount of food entering the Strip. According to the same official, these humanitarian pauses are expected to recur in the future, as needed.
The humanitarian ceasefire — as reflected in the debate that emerged in the Israeli media and among the public — is a controversial step, since it is a unilateral move that does not bind Hamas. There is no guarantee it will not seize the aid for itself.
Joining the IDF’s airdrop conducted on July 26, Arab aircraft — three from the United Arab Emirates and two from Jordan — carried out similar airdrops a day later. These countries had already performed such missions earlier in 2024. Reports in the Arab press noted that these airdrops may resume in the coming days. Additionally, in a move to assist the Gaza population, Israel has approved a UAE initiative to lay a new water line from a desalination plant in Sinai to the displacement camp in Al-Mawasi. Israel also restored electricity to the southern desalination facility in the Deir al-Balah area, which is expected to provide daily water to residents of central Gaza. It was also reported that Israel plans to increase the amount of fuel entering the Strip to 400,000 liters per week.
In line with government directives and efforts to expand humanitarian assistance, more than 250 aid trucks operated by the UN and other aid organizations — carrying food — have recently been allowed into Gaza through the crossings. At the same time, the contents of trucks parked on the Palestinian side of the Kerem Shalom and Zikim crossings were collected by international aid organizations. The contents of hundreds more trucks are still waiting to be collected and distributed inside the Gaza Strip.
Weighing Risks Against Opportunities
Given the difficulties in resuming indirect negotiations with Hamas, Israel may have no choice but to reach a clear decision on the path it must take to achieve its war objectives ultimately. Indeed, contacts are continuing through various channels. Still, suppose efforts to restart negotiations do not succeed. In that case, Israel will find itself in a situation where it must break out of the current stalemate, shift course, and make dramatic and far-reaching decisions.
At this point, Israel faces two options. The first is a proactive military operation aimed at defeating Hamas, involving complete occupation of the Gaza Strip, elimination of the organization’s leadership both inside and outside Gaza, and the imposition of an Israeli military-civilian administration in the territory. In such a scenario, Israel must consider creative “outside-the-box” options for rescuing hostages, relying on high-quality intelligence and identifying operational methods to tackle complex challenges successfully. Implementing this option is expected to exert pressure on Hamas, which may lead to a softening of its negotiating position. However, it is important to stress that pursuing this course of action could endanger the lives of the hostages, as has occurred in past military rescue attempts.
Hamas is well aware of the possibility of Israeli attempts to rescue hostages. In this context, reports have surfaced that the organization is taking strict security measures to prevent such operations. According to one report, Hamas’ military wings, in all units, have been instructed to monitor any suspicious movement, including by collaborators with Israel, to detect any attempt to locate the hostages. The sources behind this report claimed that Hamas has not ruled out the possibility of Israeli rescue missions. Additional sources within Hamas and other Palestinian factions holding hostages revealed that instructions were given to groups guarding Israeli captives to kill them if such attempts were detected. These instructions were reportedly suspended during the ceasefire period but have since been reinstated.
The second option facing Israel is a comprehensive deal to release all hostages in a single stage, in exchange for an Israeli commitment to end the war and a complete IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. This option is highly problematic, to say the least, given the expected Israeli refusal to accept a deal that leaves Hamas in control of Gaza both militarily and as a governing authority. Moreover, there is doubt as to Hamas’ willingness to agree to a deal that would require the departure of its senior operatives from the Strip, even temporarily. Additionally, Hamas may be reluctant to agree to such a deal because once it relinquishes the “hostage card,” it would come under pressure from Israel that it may be unable to withstand.
In conclusion, the current moment demands creative, alternative thinking regarding the preferred course of action in the ongoing campaign against Hamas in Gaza. In practice, Israel must combine escalating military pressure from the IDF with intensive diplomatic efforts — particularly vis-à-vis the U.S. and the mediators, Egypt and Qatar — alongside humanitarian gestures for the civilian population.
In any case, it is crucial to emphasize that a forceful military approach by Israel carries immediate and clear risks to the lives of the hostages — especially in light of reports that Hamas is actively preparing to thwart such operations, even at the cost of harming the captives.
