RSS
Israel’s Hostage Deal Is a Tragic and Historic Mistake
Orthodox Jewish men stand near a tank, ahead of a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, as seen from the Israeli side of the border with Gaza, Jan. 16, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
The Gaza hostage-ceasefire deal is a massive and crippling defeat for Israel. There is no other way to frame it.
After 15 months of fighting, the best deal Israel could secure was releasing 57 Palestinian criminals and murderers for every Israeli hostage.
Judging from a partial list of those being released, it seems very likely that far more than 98 Israelis will die as a result of this deal.
It is also clear that Israel has failed in its war aims to eradicate Hamas from Gaza and replace it with a new government. The war didn’t establish a deterrent to future terrorism; in fact, this hostage deal will likely *increase* the risk of terrorism, especially hostage-taking.
As Palestinian Media Watch has pointed out, the seeds of the October 7 massacre were planted in 2011, when Israel exchanged 1,027 Palestinian terrorists and murderers for one living Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit.
The terrorists released in 2011 went on to kill or aid in the murder of more than a thousand Israelis, and planned the October 7 massacre itself. (Yahya Sinwar was one of those released in 2011; similarly, many terrorist leaders and masterminds are being released this time).
The Gilad Shalit deal taught the Palestinian people one critical lesson: kidnapping Israelis works.
Now, once again, Palestinians are seeing the fruits of their labors with the absurd release of 1,900 Palestinian terrorists and prisoners for 33 Israelis (who aren’t even all alive).
Of course, we all want to see the 98 Israeli hostages come home — but the definition of insanity is to repeat the same policy and expect a different result; yet, that’s exactly what Israel has done.
It seems mind-boggling that Israel could not extract a better terrorist-to-hostage ratio than 57:1 after 15 months of fighting in Gaza.
Even a 5-to-1 ratio would have seemed reasonable. Yet Hamas got 11 times that, which suggests that — contrary to the claims of the Israeli government — Hamas’ capabilities have not been degraded. If Hamas had been truly weakened, Israel could have secured a much better deal.
Between future kidnapping attempts — and acts of terrorism that will be committed by the thousands of murderers and terrorists being released — it’s virtually guaranteed that far more than 98 Israelis will die in the future because of this deal. (And remember, at least 34 of those Israeli hostages are already dead).
Israel’s ethos of bringing all its people home is a beautiful one; but beauty isn’t always the answer in the face of a barbaric, unrelenting, and sadistic enemy that is determined to murder every Jew in Israel.
Perhaps one could argue that Israel owes these 98 people a special duty, since the country failed them spectacularly on October 7. But doesn’t the Israeli government owe the guarantee of life and safety to nine million people in Israel?
Israel’s government had the obligation to choose the outcome that saved the most lives. But years from now, it will become very clear that this deal took more lives than it saved.
So many innocent children, women, and men will be lost — but it seems less tragic, because we can’t see their faces yet.
If Israel really wanted to bring those hostages home at any cost, it should have prosecuted the war in a completely different way (to achieve a better hostage deal or an actual victory) — and it should be treating Palestinian terrorists and murderers in a completely different way than we are now.
Some have suggested that Phase 1 of the deal is just a ploy to get some hostages back — and that once it’s completed, Israel will continue its war in Gaza apace. That seems unlikely given the exhaustion of Israel’s military, the international pressure that will be mounted against it, and various other factors. And even if that does happen — we still will have released hundreds of murderers and terrorist masterminds; Israeli soldiers will be at much greater risk than they were before; and it’s hard to believe Israel can accomplish what it hasn’t in 15 months absent a severe change of strategy, or more troops and resources.
Others have blamed this hostage deal on the United States — yet Prime Minister Netanyahu showed that he was able to resist pressure from the Biden administration at almost every turn. Either Trump is not the loyal friend of Israel he claims to be, or Netanyahu chose not to expend his political capital to fight for a better outcome. If nothing else, the deal sheds light on Netanyahu’s weakness, and Trump’s interest in being a “dealmaker” rather than the loyal advocate of Israel that many had hoped for.
Overall, this deal signals one thing: Israel’s weakness, both geostrategically, and among its political leadership.
More terror will result from this deal — and we can only hope that it’s not worse than October 7, 2023.
We must also hope that Israel finally finds competent leadership that avoids the extremes of the far-right and far-left, but acts with common sense — and the best interest of all nine million Israeli citizens — as its guiding policy.
The author is a political commentator and political analyst.
The post Israel’s Hostage Deal Is a Tragic and Historic Mistake first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘We Didn’t Provide Aid to Nazi Germany’: US Sen. Tom Cotton Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Aid Into Gaza
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) speaks during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, March 11, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Julia Nikhinson
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) defended Israel’s decision to pause aid deliveries into the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, pointing out that the United States did not provide humanitarian assistance to Nazi Germany during World War II.
“We didn’t provide aid to Nazi Germany during World War II. The idea is preposterous. Why should Israel be forced to provide aid to Hamas-run Gaza?” Cotton posted on X/Twitter on Sunday night.
The White House also expressed support for Israel’s decision.
“Israel has negotiated in good faith since the beginning of this administration to ensure the release of hostages held captive by Hamas terrorists,” National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes said in a statement. “We will support their decision on next steps given Hamas had indicated it’s no longer interested in a negotiated ceasefire.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced earlier in the day that Israel would block humanitarian aid transfers into Gaza.
Netanyahu’s announcement came after his government presented the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas with a proposal for a six-week extension of the ongoing Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal. The proposal would mandate that Hamas release half of the remaining Israeli hostages who were kidnapped into Gaza at the beginning of the extension. The rest of the hostages would be released at the end, if Hamas and Israel can agree on a permanent ceasefire deal. Israel would retain the right to restart the war in Gaza if negotiations are unsuccessful by the 42-day mark.
According to Jerusalem, the ceasefire extension proposal was the brainchild of US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
Hamas has refused to extend the first phase of the ceasefire deal, claiming that the Jewish state has violated the terms of the original agreement.
The Netanyahu government reportedly believes that pausing aid transfers into Gaza will pressure Hamas into accepting the ceasefire extension. Hamas, which started the Gaza war when it killed 1,200 people and abducted 251 hostages during its Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel, dismissed Israel’s decision on Sunday as “cheap blackmail.”
“Unfortunately, Hamas rejected the proposal. As the first phase of the framework has ended, we have halted the entry of trucks into Gaza,” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said in a statement.
Israel’s decision to block aid deliveries into Gaza was met with widespread backlash, with some observers accusing Jerusalem of committing “genocidal acts” and violating “international law.”
However, others have pointed out that over the past few months, Gaza has experienced a surge of humanitarian aid.
“In the last six weeks, Israel has flooded Hamas Gaza with 25,000 trucks of aid,” noted former Israeli government spokesman Eylon Levy. “The enemy territory whose government is committed to permanent jihad against Israel is amply stocked for months.”
Cotton, the chairman of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has staunchly defended Israel’s defensive military operations in Gaza. In October 2024, Cotton wrote a letter to then-US President Joe Biden, condemning his administration for threatening an “arms embargo” against Israel.
In December 2024, Cotton introduced legislation to mandate the US federal government refer to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria” — terminology preferred by Israel. Cotton has also lambasted the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNWRA) for allegedly diverting funds intended for humanitarian aid into the hands of the Hamas terrorist group.
The post ‘We Didn’t Provide Aid to Nazi Germany’: US Sen. Tom Cotton Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Aid Into Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel Cut Off Aid to Gaza After Hamas Rejected Ceasefire Deal — And That’s Completely Legal
Trucks carrying aid move, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, Feb. 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri
In what may be perhaps the most significant single strategic move since the start of the war in Gaza, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office announced this weekend that, “the entry of all goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip will be halted.”
Contrary to claims of “war crimes” and “starving civilians,” this new approach to Gaza is not only completely consistent with international law — but is likely to save civilian lives on all sides and bring the war to a close far more quickly than any other approach.
The massacre of October 7, 2023, saw the largest murder of Jews since the Holocaust. The internationally-designated Hamas terror organization, along with Palestinian civilians and UN staff, invaded Israel, killed over 1,200, took 251 hostage, committed mass torture and mass rape, and brought about 16 months of war.
As I wrote the other day, Israel and Hamas completed “Phase 1” of a three stage ceasefire agreement, which resulted in the release of some of the Israeli hostages. However, the parties have so far failed to negotiate the terms of “Phase 2.” US Special Envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, presented a framework for continuing negotiations, which Israel accepted but Hamas rejected.
In response, Israel made this weekend’s announcement, and closed Gaza to aid deliveries.
Israel maintains a legal weapons blockade on Gaza, which is governed by the Geneva Conventions, The Hague Conventions, and the San Remo Convention. Under these agreements, a legal blockade is permitted as a defense against armed attack. Israel’s blockade of Gaza, which began in 2007, fits this requirement, as it is a response to Hamas’s ongoing rocket barrages on Israeli civilians.
Under these same international rules, the blockading party may not intentionally starve civilians as a tool of warfare. This effectively means that the blockading power is required to transfer humanitarian aid into the blockaded area — a requirement that Israel has fulfilled at a massive scale.
However, the aid that enters into Gaza is typically not transferred to civilians. To the contrary, Hamas, habitually steals international aid, as well as torturing and killing civilians who attempt to take the aid for themselves.
This reality has been confirmed by multiple international sources including the United Nations, and has been caught on camera numerous times.
Hamas uses stolen aid supplies to fuel its rockets, equip its troops, and sells some of what’s left to civilians as a way of raising funds for its war effort. Indeed, many of the resources Hamas used on October 7, and in the months since, were taken from aid supplies, including the tunnels where Israeli hostages are currently held, which were built with cement funded by America’s USAID agency.
In effect, Israel has been fighting a war of survival while also funding both sides: a strategy doomed to fail. This kind of national suicide is absolutely not required by international law.
To the contrary, Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV specifically states that a power is not required to allow the passage of humanitarian aid unless it is satisfied that the aid will not be diverted to enemy combatants. Therefore, not only is Israel not required to transfer aid under the present circumstances, but pressuring Israel to do so is, in itself, a war crime.
International law is structured this way for good reason: funding both sides of a conflict only serves to prolong hostilities and thus increase completely avoidable harm to civilian populations on all sides.
In this case, aid to Gaza ends up almost exclusively in the hands of an internationally -designated terror organization that is also an enemy combatant. The international community has had 18 years since the beginning of the blockade in 2007, and 16 months since the October 7 massacre, to find a solution to this particular war crime, yet has both failed and refused to do so. The consequence has been to prolong the current war, the captivity of the Israeli hostages, and also war’s deleterious impact on the lives of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians.
For the moment, this war crime of compelling Israel to provide aid to enemy combatants, in violation of Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV, has come to an end. This can only result in a quicker defeat of Hamas, and a quicker end to the current war. Such a result will, in turn, provide immeasurable benefits to Israelis, to Palestinians, and to the entire world at large.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post Israel Cut Off Aid to Gaza After Hamas Rejected Ceasefire Deal — And That’s Completely Legal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Palestinian Activists Blame Bibas Children for Their Own Murders
Kfir Bibas. Photo: Hostages and Missing Families Forum.
The confirmation of the murders of the red-haired Bibas boys was a gut punch for Israelis. For some pro-Palestinian activists, it was an opportunity to blame the victims.
Last Tuesday, the South African-based Gift of the Givers, the self-described “largest disaster response, non-governmental organisation (NGO) of African origin on the African continent,” decided to share a short video justifying the kidnapping of Shiri, Ariel, and Kfir and blaming Israel for their deaths.
It was bizarre for a supposed human rights organization to share this pro-Hamas propaganda. Some of this mystery can be explained by Gift of the Givers’ alleged membership in a Hamas funding network. The United States sanctioned the charity umbrella group Union of Good in 2008 for funding Hamas. The union’s website in the early 2000s listed Gift of the Givers as a South African-based member.
The South African government’s anti-Israel hostility may also help explain why Gift of the Givers felt comfortable sharing the victim-blaming material. The South African government has been one of Israel’s most vocal critics and a key player in Hamas’ strategy of using Palestinian suffering to isolate the Jewish State.
Six weeks after Hamas’ October 7 atrocities, South Africa’s leader had already accused Israel of war crimes “tantamount to genocide.” A month later, the government in Pretoria initiated an International Court of Justice (ICJ) case based on this false accusation. Pretoria’s Hamas cheerleading has caused friction with Washington, with Trump citing the ICJ case as part of his decision to cut aid to South Africa this February. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa is trying to reset relations with the United States, but hasn’t declared his intention to reset his approach to Palestinian terrorism.
The clip that Gift of the Givers shared began with a gunpoint recording of a ragged Yarden Bibas, Ariel and Kfir’s father, in Hamas captivity, blaming Israel’s prime minister for the death of his wife and children.
The seemingly coerced condemnation was intended to prove Israel’s guilt — and Hamas’ innocence.
The video then justified Shiri’s abduction by claiming that Palestinian terrorists “arrested” the “soldier,” and that she worked for the army and had been a member of Israel’s intelligence services. A Gazan fighter in the video even attempted to portray the kidnapping of children as a humanitarian gesture, saying, “upon her arrest, we allowed her to take her children out of mercy for them.” If those terrorists had an ounce of mercy, they would not have kidnapped babies into Gaza.
The video also repeatedly claimed that the “Nazi Israeli army” killed the Bibas family in one of its “indiscriminate airstrikes.” That fact was completely disproved by the Israeli government in forensics evidence it shared around the world, but no one seemed to care.
The attempt to draw comparisons between Israel and the Nazis is both an inversion of reality and employs the antisemitic tactic of delegitimizing Israel by claiming that the victims of Nazism have now become its perpetrators. Much like the erroneous charge of genocide, this absurd accusation erodes an important definition related to human rights.
Gift of the Givers has had other antisemitism controversies of late, with leaders declaring, “Zionists … run the world with fear. They control the world with money.”
October 7 was a “mask off” moment for many, including Gift of the Givers. The humanitarian organization and its leaders have been increasingly bold in their support of antisemitism and pro-Hamas propaganda. And why shouldn’t they, when their government serves as Hamas’ lawyer at the ICJ and accuses Israel — the victim of genocidal acts — of being the perpetrator?
David May is a research manager and senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy. Follow David on X @DavidSamuelMay. Follow FDD on X @FDD.
The post Pro-Palestinian Activists Blame Bibas Children for Their Own Murders first appeared on Algemeiner.com.