Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley from the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative stated that the plan has aspects that are unacceptable to both Israel and Hamas. “Hamas does not want to disarm and give up influence in Palestine’s future,” she said. “Israel does not want to fully withdraw from the Gaza Strip, allow the Palestinian Authority’s return, or agree to a future Palestinian state.”
The plan does not promote Palestinian self-determination, focusing more on economic development over political progress.
“It is too early to talk peace,” said Hugh Lovatt from the European Council on Foreign Relations. “The success of a ceasefire depends on the plan’s actual implementation and both parties honoring their commitments.” He stressed that international backing should depend on Israel’s full withdrawal from Gaza and a genuine political progression, otherwise the process may fail.
Michael Milshtein, an academic at Tel Aviv University and former head of the Palestinian division of Israel’s military intelligence, remarked on Hamas’ uncertain intentions. “Hamas leaders have recently asserted they won’t relinquish their weapons. Regarding Gaza’s governance, they insist that only a Palestinian regime will govern, and they will have control,” he stated to POLITICO.
He added, “From Hamas’ view, surviving the two-year intense conflict with Israel is crucial. Despite high casualties and significant arsenal losses, they will remain Gaza’s key force, exerting influence behind the scenes similar to Hezbollah in Lebanon.”
Concurrently, Milshtein worries that radical Israeli settlers will continue expanding in the West Bank, thus weakening the Palestinian Authority and benefiting Hamas.
Leave a Reply