The negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians now include elements that weigh on them, beyond the fact that they are very complex in the simple political sense: 1. The way in which the prime minister has, since October 7, linked his political and personal needs with the management of the war, including its cessation. 2. The secret desire of the zealots to exploit the war, for the purpose of annexing the West Bank and renewing settlement in Gaza. 3. Donald Trump's desire to create a new Middle East, in which at certain points, the American interest that stems from this desire, may conflict with the Israeli interest (although on the Iranian nuclear issue there is currently unanimity of opinion); such a reality may lead to a political conflict, for example if Netanyahu secretly conditions progress in the negotiations on a plea bargain (without disgrace and without prison), and is not satisfied solely with Trump's promise to act towards this goal. Immediately after the news of Israel's agreement to end the war was leaked to our newspaper, President Trump announced that he would work to rescue Netanyahu from his trial.
This week, a conflict could develop between President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu, given Trump's assessment at the weekend that a ceasefire is very close. The impression given by Trump's response regarding a ceasefire is that the American president did not attach sufficient importance to the other disputes in the negotiations, primarily the disagreement over the depth of the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. However, it is possible that Netanyahu and Trump agreed in advance on a two-phase deal, in which phase B would discuss the withdrawal and the key to releasing the hostages, and phase A would provide an American guarantee to end the war, to which Israel, as we reported, had already agreed. If this is indeed the case, this formulation of two phases and an American guarantee explains Trump's optimism for an imminent ceasefire.
Regarding the possibility that Netanyahu would condition the ceasefire on a plea bargain, it is difficult to assume that Presidents Barak and Herzog would have agreed to this, without an American update that the move is agreed upon as it involves a political move that has a decisive impact on Israel's status. Therefore, if this move does indeed take place, there is broad political consensus behind it. The newspaper's position is that such a move has very broad and very deep public opposition due to the profound public corruption that it entails. The assessment underlying the newspaper's position is that even a significant political change is not equal to the enormous, immeasurably greater, moral damage that will occur to the internal social, public, and political fabric of Israel.
The points of contention now in the negotiations with the Palestinians: 1. Details of the IDF withdrawal from the Gaza Strip 2. Key for the release of Palestinian hostages/prisoners 3. The identity of the management committee for Gaza; the Palestinians will demand that it be the management committee chosen by the Palestinian Authority and which we reported on exclusively here. The committee includes figures from the Authority and the Palestinian public, and who were appointed by agreement between Hamas on the one hand, and Fatah and the Palestinian Authority on the other.
From the events of the past month, it has become clear that President Trump is a proponent of roundabout moves that resolve disputes between several points (see our report on June 15, issue 206, on Trump's intention to create a round deal that would link the Iranian arena with the Palestinian arena, to a comprehensive agreement with Israel). See today in the Diary section the original article regarding the round deal planned by the US.