The Israeli government has given the green light for an agreement with Hamas. 50 hostages, women and children, will be released by Hamas, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners and a truce in the enclave. “A fragile agreement, full of unknowns” tempers La Repubblica« but an agreement nonetheless “.
Is this a concession from the Israeli government or Hamas? On this point the analyzes differ. THE New York Timescritic, believes that the armed group “ only did this because he was under intense military pressure » while conversely, La Repubblica consider that ” overall, the terms of the agreement do not differ much from those under discussion since the early days of the conflict “, but that Israel had to evolve its position at the same time as ” conditions on the ground », namely, international pressure, and the increasingly displayed frustration of the hostages’ relatives.
Qatar mediator
“ We sometimes have the impression that Qatar is too small for its big ambitions » notes the Swedish Zeitung and yet, it was under his supervision that an agreement could be reached. Because, analyzes the German daily, “ the emirate (…) maintains good relations with all parties to the conflict » since it houses Hamas’s political executives, has good contacts with Iran, maintains commercial relations with Israel and hosts an American military base.
The United States, moreover, which Qatar contacted “ quickly » after the attacks of October 7 with, he understands South China Morning Posta “quest”: “ Form a small team of advisors to work on the release of the hostages “, in a ” extreme secrecy “, with ” only a few people informed » continues the Chinese title. It is indeed this “ total alignment between Qatar and the United States », continues The weather in Switzerland, which resulted in the agreement.
A real ” school case », greets the Washington Postof ” how diplomatic mediations work “. Despite the ” disturbances » – the word is that of the American title – generated by the clashes, ” discussions continued » and both parties, Hamas and Israel, “ ended up trusting their messenger “. However fragile it may be, however threatened it may be, this agreement “ is the proof “, rejoices a Qatari executive quoted in the Post, “ that the dialogue works “.
The possibility of negotiations, lost sight of
Obviously, faced with a “ history of the region littered with failed peace plans, collapsed diplomatic conferences and disillusioned mediators “, it’s tempting to be pessimistic, concedes The weather.
On the one hand, there are those who are mobilized around a “ uniform speech ” bringing together ” television commentators, journalists, retired generals, experts » denounces Ha’aretzall echoing the “ new national slogan : “we will sweep away, we will destroy, we will annihilate, we will liquidate” “. And on the other side, a camp deemed just as harmful by the Israeli newspaper, “ the defenders of relativism, the champions of theory, recluse in their academic ivory towers (…) who risk their lives on Facebook and X, all reciting the mantra that the cruelty of Hamas is the product of the occupation ” and “ none of this would have happened ” if only ” the Israelis had behaved humanely » towards the Palestinians. In short, two camps “ unshakeable (…) who both know better how to behave and have magic solutions “.
Other possible ways of doing things
To the question ofHa’aretz – “ What if there was another way to fight ? » – The weatherin Switzerland, answers “yes”, since “ in the early 1990, the Oslo Accords showed what was possible “. So, the Swiss daily believes that we must turn to the avenues explored at the time, that “ the key is to use the renewed prospect of a two-state solution, to galvanize moderate forces on both sides “.
But after weeks of terror, massacre, cruelty », it will surely take time for this editorialist of Ha’aretz to reconsider “solutions”: “ How can human beings be so cruel? ? What makes such a reality possible? ? (…) I have no response : I only have questions left “.