Ceasefire Deal: Between Decision and Opposition

The ceasefire and prisoner exchange negotiations between the occupying state and Hamas are at a particularly sensitive moment, amid growing political divisions within Israel and a widening rift between security considerations and ideological alignments. While regional and international parties, led by Qatar, Egypt, and the United States, are seeking to push the deal forward, Benjamin Netanyahu's government appears mired in multiple crises that threaten its continuity. Chief among these are fierce opposition from within the far-right coalition and the crisis surrounding the legislation of the Haredi conscription law, which could tear the coalition apart from within.

Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich lead a hardline faction that opposes any agreement with Hamas. They view an understanding with the movement as tantamount to surrender, a missed "historic opportunity" to eradicate it, and the imposition of new realities, including the displacement of the Palestinian population from Gaza and the establishment of settlements in the Strip.

The opposition to Ben-Gvir and Smotrich is motivated by ideological and doctrinal principles, not merely political tactics. This makes it more difficult to convince them of a deal, even if it serves the coalition's goals and plans for the Gaza Strip and the region, including the return of the kidnapped prisoners, or a ceasefire.

On the other hand, Benjamin Netanyahu appears besieged. On the one hand, he is under pressure from the families of the hostages and Israeli public opinion, as well as international partners who want to de-escalate the situation. On the other hand, he fears losing his fragile coalition if he proceeds with the deal without the support of the religious and nationalist right.

Netanyahu is hesitant to make a decision, and it appears that balancing these pressures has become almost impossible, especially in light of the rapid developments on the Gaza front and the additional complications at home.

Despite widespread Israeli support for the release of the hostages held by Hamas, the issue has become a political flashpoint within the government. Opposition leader Yair Lapid offered what he called a "parliamentary safety net" to support the deal, stating that the Knesset could pass it despite opposition from extremists. However, Netanyahu refuses to rely on opposition support for fear of disintegrating his coalition, deepening his political deadlock.

While Israeli security agencies warn that a failure of negotiations could prompt the army to launch a major military operation in Gaza City, including evacuating residential areas and encircling the camps in the central region (Nuseirat, Bureij, Maghazi, and Deir al-Balah), the operation, while potentially weakening Hamas, would exacerbate the humanitarian catastrophe.

In contrast, Hamas is aware of the depth of the Israeli division and is betting that time may work in its favor, whether by improving the terms of negotiations or by deepening the internal Israeli impasse.

In parallel with the division over Gaza, Netanyahu's government is facing a severe crisis over the law exempting ultra-Orthodox Jews from military service. According to the newspaper Maariv, Netanyahu has made a strategic decision: either pass the law within the two remaining weeks of the parliamentary term, or head to early elections.

The ultra-Orthodox parties, which are a key partner in the government, consider the passage of the law a "red line" and have threatened to dissolve the coalition if it fails. Meanwhile, within Likud itself, there are voices opposed to concessions to the ultra-Orthodox, deepening the division within the ruling party.

Failure to pass the law could lead to the dissolution of the Knesset in November or December, with the possibility of holding elections in February or March 2026—dates that take into account religious considerations specific to the Haredi community.

These developments demonstrate that Israel is not merely facing a hostage crisis, but rather a structural crisis in governance, coalition, and the political identity of the occupying state. The extreme right has become more of a disruptive force than a partner in governance, the army and security services are leaning toward appeasement, and the political leadership capable of making critical decisions at crucial moments is absent.

The occupying state continues its war of extermination without letup, and the coming weeks will be decisive. Either Netanyahu moves toward a comprehensive settlement that includes a prisoner exchange and a conscription law, or Israel will slide into early elections amid sharp polarization and a persistent security threat. In any case, Gaza remains at the heart of the genocide, while Israel faces a moment of internal self-determination no less dangerous than the confrontation with Hamas.

In light of this, US President Donald Trump's position remains ambiguous, or perhaps aligned with Netanyahu's call for the continuation of the war and pressure on Hamas. There are indications that Trump has given Netanyahu an undeclared green light to continue military operations, taking advantage of the lack of serious international pressure, whether from Western capitals or the Arab world, to impose an urgent negotiated solution or halt the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip.

Israeli intelligence reports and leaks indicate that the occupation government has drawn up clear plans to complete its control over the remaining Gaza Strip by forcibly displacing the remaining population to the city of Rafah, using military force. According to these plans, Israel intends to establish massive tent detention camps, housing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, under the label of a "humanitarian city," a name that does not conceal the nature of the crime, which is represented by mass ethnic cleansing.

This is a pivotal moment in Gaza's history, not only in terms of the military reality, but also in terms of the future of the Palestinian presence in the Strip itself. Much depends on the Palestinians' ability, politically and socially, to confront the scenario of mass displacement and exploit the complexities of the Israeli situation, not to prolong the tragedy, but to achieve a genuine negotiating breakthrough that will stop the war and protect the Palestinians.