Hamas’ Response in Israeli-Palestinian Negotiations: Demands, Stipulations, and Implications

The sources stated that Hamas committed to a framework proposal for a ceasefire in 3 stages, each lasting for 42 days.

Within the response, the Palestinian resistance movement demanded the return of refugees to the northern areas of the Strip and ensured freedom of movement in all its regions.

Details of the Resistance Movement’s Response

Details of the response from the resistance movement also included Hamas stipulating the withdrawal of Israeli occupying forces to the demarcation line in all areas in the first stage, and their withdrawal outside the Gaza Strip in the second stage.

The sources reported by Al Jazeera also mentioned that Hamas, in its response, stipulated the announcement of a permanent ceasefire in the second stage before commencing the prisoner exchange.

The movement demanded the release of 50 Palestinian prisoners for every female prisoner, including 30 with life sentences. It also offered to release 30 Palestinian prisoners for the release of any civilian prisoner.

Within the response, the Palestinian resistance movement demanded Hamas to lift the sanctions imposed on all Palestinian prisoners after the October 7 attack. It also demanded that the third stage include a commitment to ending the siege and initiating the reconstruction process of the completely destroyed Strip.

No Choice for Hamas But to Insist on Its Positions

Commenting on Hamas’ response, Palestinian writer and political analyst Yasser Al-Zaatra said that the response was expected. He stated that the movement cannot abandon the issue of prisoners for marginal gains that do not meet the aspirations of its people, especially regarding the return of refugees, cessation of war, and withdrawal of occupying forces, in addition to humanitarian issues, even if this is done in 3 stages.

Al-Zaatra continued in a post on his platform, saying that the invaders do not want that, and Netanyahu still speaks of “absolute victory,” meaning that the deal is merely getting rid of a burdensome popular issue without paying the corresponding price, leading back to the game of killing and destruction.

Al-Zaatra concluded: “Those who fought their war with unparalleled bravery and engaged in a legendary battle will not betray their people in the political context.”