Israeli admission of the unrealistic conditions for ending the war in Gaza.. "A heavy price"

Israeli voices are increasingly calling for a comprehensive deal with Hamas at this time, asserting that Tel Aviv's conditions for ending the war in Gaza are unrealistic, and the insistence on them is less about security and more about Benjamin Netanyahu's desire to achieve the alleged "victory image" that will not materialize.

Avi Shilon, a writer for Yedioth Ahronoth, mentioned that "when Menachem Begin was asked after the peace with Egypt why he succeeded where previous negotiations failed, he said it was 'the wisdom of timing.' While there may have been many reasons for signing the agreement, timing is indeed an important element in negotiations, whether for peace purposes or post-war settlements.

What is happening now lies in the fact that Israel has missed the right timing to offer a comprehensive deal with Hamas, because despite its collapse, or rather, precisely because it is collapsing, the movement has little to lose.

He added in an article translated by "Arabi21" that "it is now clear that Tel Aviv also wants to end the war, and that the United States is pressuring to end it, but its threat to occupy Gaza is weak because it is clear to all parties that even if the occupation of Gaza causes more harm to Hamas and the residents of Gaza, the price that Israel will pay in hostages and soldiers who will be killed, its image, international pressure, and the exhaustion of its society will be extremely high. Therefore, an absurd situation has arisen that enables the weaker party, Hamas, to set its own conditions for ending the war.

He clarified that "even if Israel had offered a comprehensive deal at an earlier stage, when the military and political balance of the movement would have genuinely allowed it to threaten and continue the war, it would have ended it much faster and forced the movement to relinquish power in return. However, the wisdom of timing was thwarted by political and party interests, which now compel the government to continue, while it is clear that it is no longer interested either.

He emphasized that "timing is not only a problem, but the Israeli demands are also partially unnecessary. It is true to insist that Hamas will not continue to rule, but the talk of exiling its leaders and insisting on a few hundred meters here and there is not really related to ensuring security, but rather to Netanyahu's desire to achieve the alleged victory image. The movement has a few hundred of its leaders from the second and third tiers, and exiling them from the devastated Gaza will not benefit Tel Aviv.

He explained that: "the current situation in the sector is enough for Israel to leave it, depriving it of money for reconstruction, but it insists on conditions related to the image, not security, despite its attempt to simulate the exile of Hamas leaders as a condition for the end, similar to what happened with the expulsion of members of the Palestine Liberation Organization, including Yasser Arafat, after Tel Aviv's siege of Beirut in the summer of 1982.

He pointed out that "militarily, the exile of those thousands was an achievement, but history proves that the organization re-established itself in its new location in Tunisia, until Israel eventually signed an agreement with it in Oslo in 1993, confirming that the solution is political, not military.

He affirmed that "the Israeli demonstrations during the war for a deal that frees the hostages were also full of mistakes; that deal should have been sought long ago, but the desire to stop the war in the name of saving them turned what should have been a clear consensus into a partisan political issue, allowing opponents to say that achieving security for the future is no less important, even though the demonstrations should have long focused on the claim that shortening the duration of the war serves the interests of Israelis, even without considering the issue of hostages.