RSS
Phase Two of the Hostage Deal: What Happens Next?
People stand next to flags on the day the bodies of deceased Israeli hostages, Oded Lifschitz, Shiri Bibas, and her two children Kfir and Ariel Bibas, who were kidnapped during the deadly Oct. 7, 2023, attack by Hamas, are handed over under the terms of a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, in Tel Aviv, Israel, Feb. 20, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ammar Awad
Israel and Hamas are nearing completion of “Phase 1” of the January 19 ceasefire and hostage release deal, and what will happen next remains shrouded in mystery.
An estimated 27 living hostages and an estimated 32 bodies of murdered hostages remain in captivity. Furthermore, the Hamas terror organization remains armed and in control of Gaza, and both Israel and Hamas are expressing opposing demands for which there is no possible compromise. But the world has changed since October 7, 2023, and the way forward may offer an unexpected new option.
The deal with Hamas was designed to occur in three phases: 1. Release of Israeli women, children, and elderly hostages in exchange for the release of Palestinian terror convicts held in Israeli prisons, as well as Israeli withdrawal from certain parts of Gaza, 2. Release of all remaining hostages in exchange for permanent and complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, and 3. Rebuilding Gaza.
In effect, the only way to proceed to Phase 2 is for Israel to allow Hamas to remain in power and to be the beneficiary of massive amounts of international aid, thus almost certainly ensuring another October 7 style attack will lie in Israel’s future. Israel is determined to not permit such an outcome, and Hamas is determined to not settle for anything less.
While the Israeli government has been tight lipped about its plans (perhaps because no decision has yet been reached), one anonymous official leaked the following:
Hamas has three choices.
- Disarm, send its leaders into exile, and give up any civil control over Gaza, thus releasing the hostages and ending the war.
- Continue releasing hostages in the style of Phase 1, and thus extend the ceasefire for now.
- Return to war.
The Israeli official added that if there isn’t an agreement or another release of hostages by March 8, then war will resume.
It is unlikely that Hamas would choose option #1 (exile), which leaves option #2 (ongoing hostage release), option #3 (war), or Hamas’sdemand for total Israeli withdrawal.
Some Israelis suggest that Israel agree to Hamas’ terms as a kind of ruse, and then, once all the hostages are released, to violate the deal and return to war.Yet Hamas is not unsophisticated and will almost certainly maintain leverage over Israel: either by finding an excuse to hold back some hostages indefinitely, or else by some international mechanism that would succeed in tying Israel’s hands.
Others Israelis insist on agreeing to Hamas’ demands and paying “any price” for the return of the hostages, even if that price results in future terror attacks, future hostages, and future bloodshed for even more Israelis. Still others point out, quite correctly, that in 16 months of war, Israel has not fully accomplished any of its goals: as both Hamas remains in power, and Israeli hostages remain in Gaza.
Yet much has changed in recent months, and if Israel were to return to war, it would be prosecuted differently. Israel has been compelled to essentially fund both sides of this war, effectively providing fuel, electricity, and humanitarian supplies to Hamas. Hamas habitually stole these supplies and used them in two ways: 1. to directly support its fighters and fuel its rockets, or else 2. by selling supplies to civilians in order to raise funds for its military activities. This tactic also ensures Hamas’ ongoing popularity among the populace, as the terror group remains the sole source of food and supplies. Furthermore, international pressure greatly limited Israel’s ability to strike when and how it wished, to use certain weapons, or even to relocate Gaza’s civilians out of harm’s way, thus forcing Israel to fight through human shields.
Israel now has far greater support from the United States for aggressive action, including moving civilians out of Gaza. Such an approach would leave Gaza a total military zone, where Israel would have nearly unlimited freedom of action, and there would be no need for humanitarian aid, as there would be no civilian population to receive it. Moving civilians has proven highly effective over the past 16 months despite international doubts. For example, shortly after US Vice President Kamala Harris opposed moving civilians out of Rafah last March, claiming, “I have studied the maps, there’s nowhere for those folks to go,” Israel proved her wrong, moving a million people in just 10 days. Similar movements were accomplished out of Jabalya, Khan Yunis, and Gaza City.
It is also likely that, regardless of the fate of Hamas, Israelis will never be truly safe unless all Palestinians are relocated out of Gaza. Formerly an extreme right wing opinion, this notion is now the mainstream Israeli consensus across the entire political spectrum, with widespread support from almost all Israeli Jews (left, right and center) as well as nearly half of Israeli Arabs.
The impediment to moving Palestinians out of Gaza is therefore not the ability to physically move them, nor Israeli domestic opinion, nor international law which explicitly permits such movements, but rather the refusal of the Arab world to accept Palestinians under any circumstances.
Yet America has significant leverage over Egypt and Jordan, and has recently demonstrated a newfound openness to actually using it. For example: a mostly forgotten bit of history is that the Arab Spring (and the resulting overthrow of Egypt’s government) actually began when Russia stopped providing low cost wheat exports in 2011, thus spiking the price of bread within Egypt, and triggering the famous protests in Tahrir Square. This example demonstrates just how fragile certain middle eastern economies actually are. The United States, which provides billions of dollars of aid to Egypt and Jordan, can trigger similarly crippling economic effects with the stroke of a pen, thus endangering the very existence of entire countries without firing a shot.
Israelis are caught in a paradox: on the one hand wanting all hostages home, and on the other, wanting to fight for a safer reality on Israel’s southern border. The most likely outcome is that Phase 1 will informally continue, with ongoing hostage releases in exchange for ongoing ceasefire, until Hamas decides that the risk of no longer holding hostages is greater than the risk of imminent war. At that point, we will likely see a re-eruption of war in Gaza, but of a vastly different and more effective character than we have seen up until now.
One can only imagine how much bloodshed would have been spared on all sides, and how much more quickly the hostages might have come home, had Israel received the international support it both needed and deserved 16 months ago.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post Phase Two of the Hostage Deal: What Happens Next? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
US House Members Ask Marco Rubio to Bar Turkey From Rejoining F-35 Program
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio attends a cabinet meeting at the White House in Washington, DC, US, April 10, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Nathan Howard
A bipartisan coalition of more than 40 US lawmakers is pressing Secretary of State Marco Rubio to prevent Turkey from rejoining the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program, citing ongoing national security concerns and violations of US law.
Members of Congress on Thursday warned that lifting existing sanctions or readmitting Turkey to the US F-35 fifth-generation fighter program would “jeopardize the integrity of F-35 systems” and risk exposing sensitive US military technology to Russia. The letter pointed to Ankara’s 2017 purchase of the Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile system, despite repeated US warnings, as the central reason Turkey was expelled from the multibillion-dollar fighter jet program in 2019.
“The S-400 poses a direct threat to US aircraft, including the F-16 and F-35,” the lawmakers wrote. “If operated alongside these platforms, it risks exposing sensitive military technology to Russian intelligence.”
The group of signatories, spanning both parties, stressed that Turkey still possesses the Russian weapons systems and has shown “no willingness to comply with US law.” They urged Rubio and the Trump administration to uphold the Countering American Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) and maintain Ankara’s exclusion from the F-35 program until the S-400s are fully removed.
The letter comes after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan claimed during a NATO summit in June that Ankara and Washington have begun discussing Turkey’s readmission into the program.
Lawmakers argued that reversing course now would undermine both US credibility and allied confidence in American defense commitments. They also warned it could disrupt development of the next-generation fighter jet announced by the administration earlier this year.
“This is not a partisan issue,” the letter emphasized. “We must continue to hold allies and adversaries alike accountable when their actions threaten US interests.”
RSS
US Lawmakers Urge Treasury to Investigate Whether Irish Bill Targeting Israel Violates Anti-Boycott Law
A pro-Hamas demonstration in Ireland led by nationalist party Sinn Fein. Photo: Reuters/Clodagh Kilcoyne
A group of US lawmakers is calling on the Treasury Department to investigate and potentially penalize Ireland over proposed legislation targeting Israeli goods, warning that the move could trigger sanctions under longstanding US anti-boycott laws.
In a letter sent on Thursday to US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, 16 Republican members of Congress expressed “serious concerns” about Ireland’s recent legislative push to ban trade with territories under Israeli administration, including the West Bank, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights.
The letter, spearheaded by Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY), called for the US to “send a clear signal” that any attempts to economically isolate Israel will “carry consequences.”
The Irish measure, introduced by Foreign Affairs and Trade Minister Simon Harris, seeks to prohibit the import of goods and services originating from what the legislation refers to as “occupied Palestinian territories,” including Israeli communities in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Supporters say the bill aligns with international law and human rights principles, while opponents, including the signatories of the letter, characterize it as a direct extension of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement, which seeks to isolate Israel as a step toward the destruction of the world’s lone Jewish state.
Some US lawmakers have also described the Irish bill as an example of “antisemitic hate” that could risk hurting relations between Dublin and Washington.
“Such policies not only promote economic discrimination but also create legal uncertainty for US companies operating in Ireland,” the lawmakers wrote in this week’s letter, urging Bessent to determine whether Ireland’s actions qualify as participation in an “unsanctioned international boycott” under Section 999 of the Internal Revenue Code, also known as the Ribicoff Amendment.
Under that statute, the Treasury Department is required to maintain a list of countries that pressure companies to comply with international boycotts not sanctioned by the US. Inclusion on the list carries tax-reporting burdens and possible penalties for American firms and individuals doing business in those nations.
“If the criteria are met, Ireland should be added to the boycott list,” the letter said, arguing that such a step would help protect US companies from legal exposure and reaffirm American opposition to economic efforts aimed at isolating Israel.
Legal experts have argued that if the Irish bill becomes law, it could chase American capital out of the country while also hurting companies that do business with Ireland. Under US law, it is illegal for American companies to participate in boycotts of Israel backed by foreign governments. Several US states have also gone beyond federal restrictions to pass separate measures that bar companies from receiving state contracts if they boycott Israel.
Ireland has been one of the fiercest critics of Israel on the international stage since the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, massacre across southern Israel, amid the ensuing war in Gaza, leading the Jewish state to shutter its embassy in Dublin.
Last year, Ireland officially recognized a Palestinian state, a decision that Israel described as a “reward for terrorism.”
RSS
US Families File Lawsuit Accusing UNRWA of Supporting Hamas, Hezbollah
A truck, marked with United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) logo, crosses into Egypt from Gaza, at the Rafah border crossing between Egypt and the Gaza Strip, during a temporary truce between Hamas and Israel, in Rafah, Egypt, Nov. 27, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Amr Abdallah Dalsh
American families of victims of Hamas and Hezbollah attacks have filed a lawsuit against the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, accusing the organization of violating US antiterrorism laws by providing material support to the Islamist terror groups behind the deadly assaults.
Last week, more than 200 families filed a lawsuit in a Washington, DC district court accusing the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) of violating US antiterrorism laws by providing funding and support to Hamas and Hezbollah, both designated as foreign terrorist organizations.
The lawsuit alleges that UNRWA employs staff with direct ties to the Iran-backed terror group, including individuals allegedly involved in carrying out attacks against the Jewish state.
However, UNRWA has firmly denied the allegations, labeling them as “baseless” and condemning the lawsuit as “meritless, absurd, dangerous, and morally reprehensible.”
According to the organization, the lawsuit is part of a wider campaign of “misinformation and lawfare” targeting its work in the Gaza Strip, where it says Palestinians are enduring “mass, deliberate and forced starvation.”
The UN agency reports that more than 150,000 donors across the United States have supported its programs providing food, medical aid, education, and trauma assistance in the war-torn enclave amid the ongoing conflict.
In a press release, UNRWA USA affirmed that it will continue its humanitarian efforts despite facing legal challenges aimed at undermining its work.
“Starvation does not pause for politics. Neither will we,” the statement read.
Last year, Israeli security documents revealed that of UNRWA’s 13,000 employees in Gaza, 440 were actively involved in Hamas’s military operations, with 2,000 registered as Hamas operatives.
According to these documents, at least nine UNRWA employees took part directly in the terror group’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel.
Israeli officials also uncovered a large Hamas data center beneath UNRWA headquarters, with cables running through the facility above, and found that Hamas also stored weapons in other UNRWA sites.
The UN agency has also aligned with Hamas in efforts against the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an Israeli and US-backed program that delivers aid directly to Palestinians, blocking Hamas from diverting supplies for terror activities and selling them at inflated prices.
These Israeli intelligence documents also revealed that a senior Hamas leader, killed in an Israeli strike in September 2024, had served as the head of the UNRWA teachers’ union in Lebanon, where Lebanon is based,
UNRWA’s education programs have been found by IMPACT-se, an international organization that monitors global education, to contribute to the radicalization of younger generations of Palestinians.