- 16:33SpaceX leads bid to develop Trump's Golden Dome missile shield
- 16:05Strengthening regional cooperation between Île-de-France and Morocco
- 15:35Escalating tragedy: The Gaza conflict and its devastating toll on Palestinian lives
- 15:04Spain reaffirms support for Morocco’s autonomy initiative on the Sahara
- 14:32Putin thanks Hamas for releasing hostages during Kremlin meeting
- 14:07King Mohammed VI Congratulates Syrian President on Evacuation Day Anniversary
- 13:32Domestic demand boosts economic growth in late 2024
- 11:33Nvidia faces $5.5bn loss due to US AI chip export restrictions to China
- 11:07Facing Cybersecurity Threats Three Questions to an Expert
Follow us on Facebook
Hamas Calls for Revisiting Previous Gaza Ceasefire Proposal Amid Escalating Conflict
In a significant development in the ongoing Gaza conflict, Hamas has urged mediators to revisit an existing ceasefire proposal rather than pursue new negotiations. This appeal comes just days before scheduled talks initiated by the United States, Egypt, and Qatar, set to take place on August 15.
Hamas, in an official statement released on its Telegram channel, expressed its preference for a plan "based on [US President Joe] Biden's May 31 ceasefire proposal, the framework laid out by mediators Qatar and Egypt on May 6, and UN Security Council Resolution 2735." The May 6 proposal, which Hamas had previously accepted but Israel rejected, includes provisions for the release of Israeli captives in Gaza and an unspecified number of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons.
The Palestinian group emphasized that mediators should "enforce this [May 6 proposal] on the occupation [Israel] instead of pursuing further rounds of negotiations or new proposals that would provide cover for the occupation's aggression and grant it more time to continue its genocide against our people."
This stance by Hamas has led to varied interpretations. While some Israeli media outlets have construed it as a rejection of the upcoming ceasefire talks, Al Jazeera's Hamdah Salhut, reporting from Amman, Jordan, clarified that Hamas's statement does not explicitly refuse negotiations. Instead, it calls for a return to the original proposal they had previously agreed to.
The context for this development is complex. Last week, leaders from the US, Egypt, and Qatar proposed negotiations between Israel and Hamas, scheduled for August 15 in either Cairo or Doha. These talks aim to finalize a Gaza ceasefire and captive release deal. Hamas spokesman Jihad Taha had earlier stated that the group's leadership was "studying" the invitation for these talks.
Taha pointed out that "the one obstructing the success of the last proposal is the Israeli occupation" and emphasized the need for "real pressure on the Israeli side" to close the remaining gaps in the ceasefire agreement.
The Israeli position, as articulated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has been firm in rejecting any deal that does not include the complete defeat of Hamas. However, Israel has indicated its willingness to send negotiators to the August 15 meeting.
If the talks proceed, they will mark a significant shift in Hamas's negotiation strategy, with Gaza leader Yahya Sinwar at the helm following Israel's assassination of Ismail Haniyeh.
Meanwhile, the conflict on the ground continues to escalate. An Israeli airstrike on the al-Tabin School compound in Gaza City, housing displaced Palestinian families, reportedly killed approximately 100 people on Saturday. Hamas condemned this attack as the "al-Tabin school massacre," stating it is "proof that [Israel] only wants to escalate its aggression."
Despite this latest tragedy, Hamas has reiterated its commitment to adhere to the proposal previously laid out by mediators. This stance underscores the group's desire for a resolution based on previously agreed terms, even as violence continues to ravage the region.
As the August 15 talks approach, the international community watches closely, hoping for a breakthrough that could bring an end to the devastating conflict. The coming days will be crucial in determining whether the parties can bridge their differences and move towards a lasting ceasefire, or if the cycle of violence will continue unabated.
Comments (0)