Connect with us

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.

  1. Disarm, send its leaders into exile, and give up any civil control over Gaza, thus releasing the hostages and ending the war.
  2. Continue releasing hostages in the style of Phase 1, and thus extend the ceasefire for now.
  3. 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.

Continue Reading

RSS

Federal Judge Dismisses Antisemitism Lawsuit Against Harvard University

Illustrative 373rd Commencement Exercises at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts on May 23, 2024. Photo: Brian Snyder via Reuters Connect

Harvard University has secured a major legal victory against one of the many lawsuits it has faced over its alleged mismanagement of campus antisemitism after the Oct. 7 massacre.

On Wednesday, a judge dismissed a suit in which ten Harvard alumni alleged that the university had cheapened their degrees during the 2023-2024 academic year by giving anti-Zionist protesters free rein to promote antisemitism, terrorism, and the destruction of Israel.

Filed in a Massachusetts federal court in Feb. 2024, the complaint claimed that Harvard has breached an informal but binding agreement to preserve the institution’s prestige in perpetuity and thereby protect alumni’s investment in a Harvard degree. That compact was violated, the former students alleged, by Harvard’s failing to correct a noxious campus environment and a negative perception of the university which has caused potential employers and prestigious law firms to reject job applicants who carry any affiliation with it.

District Court Judge George O’Toole Jr. — appointed to bench by former president Bill Clinton in 1995 — disagreed with their argument, however, ruling that they presented no evidence which proves that the university’s policies injured them personally.

“The plaintiffs do not currently attend Harvard, nor are they employed by Harvard,” wrote the O’Toole, who is an alumnus of Harvard Law School (HLS). “They graduated from Harvard many years before the central events referred to in the complaint. They are not themselves directly affected by Harvard’s recent administrative actions and/or omissions, and consequently they have no cognizable legal injury that could be redressed through this suit.”

Judge O’Toole Jr. was recently involved in another high profile legal fight. Earlier this month, he temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s plan to restructure federal government by shrinking its workforce, a decision he walked back six days later when he ruled that the parties who challenged the initiative lacked standing. The highly regarded jurist’s career has seen him render rulings on a range of matters, from the criminal investigation of the Boston Marathon Bombing to a defamation suit filed against Barbara Walters by an alleged former associate — a claim he dismissed.

Following the decision, Harvard University said it is “committed to ensuring our Jewish community is embraced, respected, and can thrive at Harvard, and to our efforts to confront antisemitism and all forms of hate.”

Harvard recently settled two antisemitism lawsuits, which were merged by a federal judge in November 2024, in Jan. The agreement, coming one day after the inauguration of President Donald Trump — who vowed to tax the endowments of universities where antisemitism is rampant — prevented a prolonged legal fight that would have been interpreted by the Jewish community as a willful refusal to acknowledge the discrimination to which Jewish students are subjected.

According to details of the settlement disclosed by the university, Harvard will add the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism to its non-discrimination and anti-bullying policies (NDAB), recognize the centrality of Zionism to Jewish identity, and explicitly state that targeting and individual on the basis of their Zionism constitutes a violation of school rules.

Harvard’s legal counsel has more litigation in its future, however, as a case brought by Harvard graduate student Shabbos Kestenbaum, who has made similar claims as the groups which agreed to settle their cases, is still pending. Kestenbaum was a member of one of those groups, Students Against Antisemitism (SAA), but declined to be a party to the settlement due to this belief that a public trial will fully reveal the extent of Harvard’s alleged transgressions and result in its being held accountable for alleged failing .

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

Reporter Debbie Weiss contributed to this story.

The post Federal Judge Dismisses Antisemitism Lawsuit Against Harvard University first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Most Gazans Reject Hamas Rule and Doubt Its Ability to Govern: Poll

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

Most Gazans reject Hamas rule post-war and question its ability to govern as tensions rise and efforts continue for the second phase of the ceasefire agreement, according to a new poll.

The Institute for Social and Economic Progress (ISEP), a Palestine-based independent research institute, conducted a representative poll in Gaza on January 22, revealing that only 6% of Gazans prefer Hamas to rule post-war, while just 5.3% would vote for the group in future elections.

As perception of Hamas in the Gaza Strip remains negative, the survey found that 70% of respondents believe the terrorist group lacks the ability to govern, and only 12.4% expect it to remain in power post-war.

Meanwhile, Gazans have shown increased support for Fatah rule, the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s ruling party, after the ceasefire, with 60% favoring its leadership.

Respondents show increased support for Fatah rule in the Gaza Strip post-ceasefire. Photo: Institute for Social and Economic Progress (ISEP)

Hamas-led Palestinian terrorists started the war in Gaza when they murdered 1,200 people and kidnapped 251 hostages during their invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

Israel responded with a military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.

Last month, both sides reached a ceasefire and hostage-release deal brokered by the US, Egypt, and Qatar.

According to ISEP’s recent poll, 67.9% of Gazans credit US President Donald Trump for the success of the ceasefire deal, with Qatar following behind. Most respondents also believe the ceasefire will hold and lead to reconstruction efforts, with over 60% highly confident in its stability and another 30% considering it somewhat secure.

Two in three (67.9%) respondents in the Gaza Strip credit Trump for the success of the ceasefire deal. Photo: Institute for Social and Economic Progress (ISEP)

Under phase one of the ceasefire agreement, Hamas agreed to release 33 Israeli hostages, including eight who are deceased, in exchange for Israel freeing over 1,900 Palestinian prisoners, many serving multiple life sentences for terrorism-related offenses, and withdrawing troops from some positions in Gaza.

So far, 29 Israeli hostages – plus five Thais – have been released in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners and detainees, with the bodies of four more hostages, initially due to be handed over on Thursday, still to come.

The initial phase of the ceasefire deal is set to end on Saturday, while negotiations for the second phase, aimed at securing the release of remaining hostages and the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, are ongoing.

ISEP’s survey found that 89% of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip lack the means to rebuild their lives after the war. Housing support was cited as the most helpful form of aid, with one in three also emphasizing that housing and shelter should be the priority of reconstruction efforts.

One in three (30%) respondents believe that housing and shelter should be the priority of rebuilding efforts. Photo: Institute for Social and Economic Progress (ISEP)

After the war, Gaza’s future remains uncertain, but Israel has ruled out any role for Hamas or the Palestinian Authority. Meanwhile, Hamas says it does not necessarily need to stay in power but insists on being consulted.

With the exception of Israel, most Arab states have rejected Trump’s plan to “take over” Gaza to rebuild the war-torn enclave, while relocating Palestinians elsewhere during reconstruction efforts. Trump has called on Egypt, Jordan, and other Arab states to take in Palestinians from Gaza after nearly 16 months of war between Israel and Hamas.

Middle Eastern leaders, expected to bear much of the financial burden of rebuilding Gaza, have struggled to propose their own plan but insist on a role for the Palestinian Authority, while also advocating for a two-state solution.

This week, former Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid, now the opposition leader in Israel’s parliament, proposed “The Egyptian Solution” as his alternative plan for Gaza’s reconstruction after the war. The proposal, which suggested Egypt administer Gaza for 8-15 years in exchange for canceling its $155 billion external debt, was rejected by Cairo.

The post Most Gazans Reject Hamas Rule and Doubt Its Ability to Govern: Poll first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

‘The View’ Co-Host Sara Haines Honors Murdered Bibas Family While Whoopi Goldberg Accused of Generalizing Their Murder

Kfir Bibas. Photo: Hostages and Missing Families Forum.

During Tuesday’s episode of the ABC talk show “The View,” co-host Sara Haines drew attention to murdered Hamas hostages Shiri, Ariel and Kfir Bibas right before co-host Whoopi Goldberg attempted to generalize their barbaric murder and compare it to all human suffering.

“These two little boys, they became, with their mother, kind of the symbol of October 7th,” Haines said, during the Hot Topics segment of the show. She talked about Hamas having a staged ceremony to show off their dead bodies in the Gaza Strip during handing them over to the Red Cross, as part a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, and how the US-designated terrorist organization originally gave the incorrect body to Israel for Shiri, who was 32 at the time of her death.

Ariel, 4, and Kfir, 10 months old, along with their mother were brutally murdered in November 2023 by Hamas terrorists during their captivity. Shiri and her two red-headed young bodies were held hostage in the Gaza Strip for more than 500 days before Hamas returned their bodies to Israel. They were buried on Wednesday. Forensics examination of their bodies revealed that Hamas murdered Ariel and Kfir “were their bare hands” and afterwards “committed horrific acts to cover up these atrocities.”

Haines concluded her remarks during Tuesday’s episode of “The View” by acknowledging the 63 hostages who are still in Gaza, after being abducted by Hamas-led terrorists on Oct. 7, 2023. “There are 60 more remaining hostages in Gaza,” she said. “They’re still there and our hearts are with Israel and the families. This is the most heart-wrenching part for everything.”

Haines’ co-hosts on “The View” include Goldberg, Joy Behar, Sunny Hostin and Alyssa Farah Griffin.

After Haines concluded talking about the Bibas family and the remaining hostages, Goldberg made comments that equated the savage murder of the Bibas family by a worldwide recognized terrorist organization to suffering people are experiencing around the world, including in Russia. Her remarks, and the fact that she draw attention away from the murder of the Bibas family, have sparked outrage from Israel supporters, including celebrities, and pro-Israel organizations.

“There is nothing positive about any of this,” Goldberg said. “For everyone who’s affecting, our hearts should go out. All the families, all the children. This is horrifying. I find it so shocking that when we talk about things like Hamas, and I look at where we’re putting our energy, I think – well, who are the bad guys now?”

Her fellow co-hosts all replied at the same time saying Hamas is “the bad guy.” Goldberg quickly cut in and said, “Hamas is the bad guy, but what about Russia? Is Russia not bad with all they’ve been doing?” Hostin then reminded her co-hosts that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has an International Criminal Court arrest warrant issued against him, which the US House of Representatives has condemned.

“But there’s no equivocation of Netanyahu and Hamas,” Griffin reminded the ladies. “Hamas needs to be destroyed.”

Goldberg ended the Hot Topics segment of the show saying: “My point is, when do we stop saying, ‘It’s these folks, or these folks.’ When do we say, ‘Here’s the enemy. This is what the enemy does. This is what the enemy does to children in Africa, all over the world, because they’re the enemy.’ That’s what the enemies do. And why are we supportive of enemies? What’s happening? I don’t always get it right and they don’t always get it right. But we’ll figure out the answers at some point, I’m sure.”

Creative Community for Peace, a pro-Israel entertaining industry organization, said it is “deeply troubled” by Goldberg’s remarks. Others called her “despicable” for comparing “the depravity of Hamas to Russia,” for “marginalizing” the murder of the Bibas family, and needing to “generalize and universalize Jewish suffering,” as said by comedian and musician Ami Kozak. American actress Patricia Heaton, who is best known for her role on “Everybody Loves Raymond,” also blasted Goldberg in a post on X.

“Why do people like Whoopi seem to need to neutralize the murder of the Shiri, Ariel and Kefir [sic] by claiming ‘this is about everyone who is affected,’” Heaton wrote. “Isn’t that what you railed against when people said ‘all lives matter’ in response to BLM [Black Lives Matter]?” “Why do they have such a difficult time acknowledging that these babies were strangled to death because they are Jewish? It’s not the same as Gazan casualties of war. Not at all.”

“How dare you both-sides the Bibas family and use them as a prop in your dangerous propaganda narrative,” Jewish award-winning radio talk show host and columnist Dahlia Kurtz wrote in a social media post addressed to Goldberg. “A mother and her babies were — barbarically — executed by a terror organization. Then held in captivity for ransom. This while her husband and the babies’ father was held hostage — and savagely tortured. Three generations of the innocent Bibas family were murdered. Plus their beloved dog. This is not about everyone’s suffering. This is about the Bibas family.”

The post ‘The View’ Co-Host Sara Haines Honors Murdered Bibas Family While Whoopi Goldberg Accused of Generalizing Their Murder first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News