In the year since Hamas’ October 7 attack on Israel, there has been only one successful break in hostilities: in one week in November, Hamas traded 110 Israeli prisoners for 240 Palestinian prisoners.
Since then the Biden administration has repeatedly touted cease-fire deals that have gone nowhere — both between Israel and Hamas and, more recently, between Israel and Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shiite militia fighting an Israeli offensive in southern Lebanon.
Other parties have also tried. The UN has attempted to secure cease-fire resolutions multiple times, although the US has vetoed or abstained from each. In September, France and the United States tried to advance 21-day truce between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Both Hezbollah and the Israeli government rejected the offer.
The cost of that failure has been high. At this time, More than 40,000 Palestinians Killed in Gaza. Israel has expanded its war into Lebanon, killing nearly 2,000 people there and increasing violence in the West Bank. Israel is also considering a response to an Iranian attack earlier this month, in which about 180 missiles landed on Israeli territory.
Unlike previous Israeli conflicts, no end to the war is in sight, at least not through diplomatic means. The recent death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar may have sparked renewed negotiations, but the same core issues remain.
Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah cannot agree to a ceasefire because they are at cross purposes
The short answer to why the ceasefire talks have failed is that each of the three parties directly involved in the regional conflict – Hamas, Israel and Hezbollah – has claimed that their negotiating partners are either unwilling or unable to meet.
When it comes to Israel’s conflict with Hamas, the country’s claims have been both elaborate and abstract. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was reportedly set on fire Possible July ceasefire agreement with Hamas insisting that Israeli troops maintain a permanent presence in Gaza and that Israel continue to control the Gaza/Egypt border.
These are much bigger – and more unrealistic – than earlier demands for the return of Israeli hostages in Gaza, which revolved around the initial ceasefire talks. And more broadly, Israel’s goals in Gaza are somewhat subjective: Israeli leaders have repeatedly said they want to completely eliminate Hamas’ military and governance power, a goal Hamas has categorically rejected and which U.S. officials Said unlikely.
Eliminating a political ideology, which is at the core of Hamas, is very difficult, and Israel has not made clear under what circumstances it would be satisfied with achieving its goals – whether that means the death or imprisonment of key leaders, the elimination of outside support, an Israeli occupation of Gaza, or some other scenario. .
“It seems clearer to me what the Israeli government considers unacceptable than what it considers acceptable,” John Altermandirector of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, told Vox. “The challenge it will have is keeping track of what is achievable and sustainable. Both are certainly less than what the government wants.”
Similarly, Israel’s stated goal in the conflict with Hezbollah — to ensure that the group cannot attack Israel like Hamas did on October 7 — is opaque. This could mean pushing the group a certain distance from Israel’s northern border The government in Lebanon is pushing for change.
Israel is unlikely to be able to dismantle Hezbollah entirely, but it could aim to shift the balance of power in its decades-long conflict with the organization.
“This time, they hurt Hezbollah, and with a direct fight between Israel and Iran, Israel hoped to fundamentally change the threat to Iran’s proxies. [like Hamas and Hezbollah] pose to Israel” Nathan SachsDirector of the Brookings Institution’s Middle East Program told Vox. “They think they’ve succeeded, and they hope to build on their success, making them less interested in a ceasefire than in the past.”
That is, the abstract and shifting nature of Israel’s claims may be the point; It is impossible to find a workable solution when it is not clear what a party wants or when its demands will be satisfied. And with US support still strong, Israel has no real reason to compromise.
Hamas’s goals have been further cemented in the reconciliation process, although the fighting has only lasted a few months, with the presence of Israeli troops in Gaza adding a new dimension to the group’s demands.
Now, “You’ve got Hamas insisting on Israel’s complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, a complete and total cessation of hostilities, it’s demanding the return of people from the south to the north. And obviously, the release of prisoners [from Israeli prisons]. And that doesn’t exactly match what Israel is demanding, which is the complete and total destruction of Hamas,” Tahani Mustafa, Palestine analyst at the International Crisis Group. told Vox in May.
Five months later, Hamas’ target remains.
According to Mustafa, Hamas also has a larger goal with any ceasefire talks: ensuring the permanent status of a Palestinian state. Gaza and the West Bank, As well as the right of Palestinians to return to their ancestral home in what is now Israel, both are goals of the group 2017 Charter. But Netanyahu has repeatedly made clear that he will not accept any form of Palestinian state. And Public opinion polling since May indicates that many Jewish Israelis do not believe it is possible to live peacefully alongside the Palestinians.
“Hamas’ vision is a two-state solution,” Mustafa said. However, he added, “they will not publicly abandon the idea of a full, free Palestine” — that is, establishing a state that encompasses all of historic Palestine, an area that includes Israeli territory.
Hamas understands that “the reality will not allow it, so they also accept the two-state solution,” Mustafa said. “So for Hamas, the objective is to start that discussion.”
A ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, meanwhile, presents a circular problem. Hezbollah initially attacked Israel in support of Hamas; It has fired rockets into Israel since October 8, 2023, maintaining that the attacks will stop only if there is a Gaza ceasefire. The Hezbollah leadership recently indicated that it would support a non-binding cease-fire with GazaBut it is not clear whether this is now official policy.
A cease-fire does not appear to be forthcoming, which means that—unless Hezbollah actually changes its position—Israel will continue its attacks on Lebanon and potentially push further into the country.
The US is not pulling its weight, and the UN is toothless
Ceasefire negotiations are complex, multiparty issues; Egypt and Qatar are important mediators, as they both have ties to Israel and Hamas. Although the United States and the international community have been able to mediate Israeli conflicts with its neighbors in the past, they now have little influence for a number of reasons.
“US influence, and the US ability to dictate events, or at least to control their control and narrative, has in many cases declined,” Andrew HydeDr. Stimson Center Director and Senior Fellow. This is partly because the United States is no longer the dominant regional power it was in the late 20th century; Like Russia, Iran has been able to increase its influence in recent decades.
In the past, when Israel invaded Lebanon and launched operations against Hamas, both the United States and the international community succeeded in halting hostilities. Sometimes this happened through the United Nations, such as in 1978 when the UN Security Council Implemented a resolution calling for Israel to leave Lebanon.
Other times, there are US presidential administrations directly intervenedLike when President Ronald Reagan Intercepted shipments of artillery and fighter jets for Israel’s bombing of Beirut in 1982 and 1983or when first The Bush administration used access to funds To pressure Israel over illegal settlements in Palestinian territories.
Anelle ShelainA research fellow at the Quincy Institute’s Middle East Program, argues that today, the United States could take similar steps to rein in Israel — in Gaza and Lebanon — but has little interest in doing so.
“This is what the US government said They are not actually asking for a ceasefire in LebanonWhich is quite surprising, given that Israel has engaged in this flagrant violation of the UN Charter by invading Lebanon,” Shilen said. “Regarding the administration’s failure to achieve a cease-fire in Gaza … for me, the short answer is that the United States is not really using any leverage to reach that outcome. So it seems clear to me that this is not really the outcome the administration wants.”
Although Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin Recently warned Netanyahu They will consider halting arms shipments until the humanitarian situation in Gaza improves, the US has failed to capitalize on the fact that it has delivered almost $18 billion in materials and related support The past year has pushed Israel into decline.
Iran is not an actor in the ceasefire talks, although direct attacks between itself and Israel have increased. But it plays a role in this conversation because both Hamas and, to a much greater extent, Hezbollah are part of a network of groups called the Axis of Resistance fighting Israel under Iranian supervision. Broadly speaking, these groups are fighting on behalf of the Palestinians, and it is unlikely that Iran or any of its allies will give up until there is a cease-fire in Gaza.
And the Iranian government itself is facing this Internal crisis of legitimacyAnd it needs a win. A victory for Hamas or Hezbollah would provide good public relations for Iranian leaders and may not come with a cease-fire.
“The axis part of the strategy of resistance since October 7 has shown that the unity of the arena strategy that brought the axis groups together – they want to show that it is working,” Sanam wakilDirector of Middle East and North Africa program of Chatham House.
Although many countries – particularly in the Global South – and global institutions such as the International Court of Justice and the United Nations have called for a ceasefire and pressured Israel to end its occupation of Gaza, the West Bank and Jerusalem, the role of these bodies will remain minimal for the foreseeable future.
Because U.S. goals in the conflict are inconsistent with international institutions, Hyde said. With veto power in the UN Security Council, the United States has far more power over the mechanisms through which international law is supposed to be administered.
“Institutions roll over very easily. In terms of the Israeli situation at the moment, where the UN should stand for many things and has tried to stand for both in its leadership and in its charter, this does not suit the Israeli government in any way. , shape, or form,” Hyde said. “[Israel] Made a point of not only honoring it, but openly denying it. And then, on behalf of the US establishment, to the Israelis, to say, ‘Well, you know, you really have to respect this.’
