Israel-Hamas’ Fragile Ceasefire Is Already at Risk
 
The Gaza ceasefire announced on Wednesday night marks a tentative end to a 15-month conflict that’s left tens of thousands dead, far more homeless and Israel’s enemies across the Middle East reeling. But it’s a fragile reprieve.
 
(...)
 
While the agreement is expected to bring back about three dozen hostages taken by Hamas in the attack, it falls short of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s long-stated goal of demolishing the group’s grip on Gaza and provides no answer to the question of what will replace Hamas in the enclave.
 
Under the deal, Israel agrees to pull its troops from densely populated areas and allow in hundreds of trucks a day of desperately needed aid. But the pact, which still needs Israeli government approval, could implode within six weeks when the first phase—so far the only part that’s actually agreed—ends. That would leave more hostages behind and 2 million Gazans mostly homeless and struggling to withstand the winter.
 
“This accord is not going to end the war in Gaza, nor is it going to free all the hostages,” said Aaron David Miller, a former State Department Middle East official and now a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “This is a limited agreement,” he said, that will “begin to create a predictable and stable environment where international assistance can be surged rather than just dribbled into Gaza.”
 
(...)
 
Under the agreement, Israel is expected to do things many of its politicians swore it wouldn’t—release large numbers of Palestinians who’ve murdered Israelis and step back from its 15-month effort to destroy Hamas root and branch. US pressure, as well as Israel’s own domestic political and economic concerns, shifted the balance for Netanyahu.
 
(...)
 
The real question is what the two sides will decide about the following phase when Hamas wants a full Israeli withdrawal so it can resume power, and Israel wants to remove Hamas entirely from authority.
 
That’s the core disagreement that long prevented the sides from signing a deal. The fact that they’ve done so now—without an ironclad guarantee of an eventual full withdrawal—says something about Hamas’s concession.
 
Hamas agreed to this deal because it wants its prisoners out, it wants massive aid which it will try to control, and it hopes that once Israel has stopped its military actions for a ceasefire, its troops will not return.
 
But after the first phase, tougher negotiations will begin. Israel wants a wide buffer zone within the strip and to keep its troops along the border with Egypt, both demands Hamas rejects. And it wants to replace Hamas with something it hasn’t yet figured out.
 
(...)
 
Israel, which disagrees with the claim that Hamas is rapidly replacing its troops, may eventually treat Gaza as it does parts of the occupied West Bank—sending in troops for short operations to reduce hostile forces. That’s hardly a scenario that would make rebuilding the coastal strip easier or do much to lure Gulf Arab states to spend money doing so.
 
At the same time, the Israeli economy is desperate for some relief.
 
(...)
 
More than 400 soldiers have been killed in the war and many Israelis aren’t persuaded anymore that they’re dying in a cause that can be won the way the government has promised. They’re worried that troops in Gaza are just sitting ducks. (...)
 
Netanyahu and his closest aides have long asserted that Hamas needs to be fully defeated to send a message to Israel’s enemies: anyone who carries out an attack as savage as the one of Oct. 7, 2023 has written his own death warrant, full stop.
 
But Israel has efficiently taken down its opponents who joined in the war to support Hamas. This past fall, Israel said its fighter planes took out much of Iran’s air defense system and missile production capacity, most of Hezbollah’s long-range missiles and assassinated the top ranks of Hezbollah and Hamas. Shortly thereafter, the Iran-backed Syrian government fell.
 
This has led some in Israel to say that eliminating Hamas is no longer the central goal it once was and that attention now needs to turn to building relations with Saudi Arabia and maintaining close ties with the US.
 
(...)

« Tu vas devoir policer ton discours », précise Bader. « Wikipédia te donne un espace commun, tu le partages avec des sionistes, avec des racistes, mais comme dans la société, il y a des règles sur lesquelles on va jouer. » Il semble croire lui-même à sa propre propagande. La plupart du temps, précise-t-il, « en étant neutre, on est du côté palestinien ». Comme exemple de média impartial sur le sujet, il conseille… L'Humanité, titre communiste historiquement et indéfectiblement propalestinien.
 
Il nous donne des astuces pour « faire sauter » des sources journalistiques qui ne sont pas dans sa ligne, en contestant leur fiabilité ou les accusant de parti pris. Un classique. Comme le révélait une enquête du Point, la fiche Wikipédia de l'hebdomadaire, tout comme celles de plusieurs de ses journalistes, est la cible de contributeurs, qui tentent depuis des années d'attaquer sa fiabilité. « On peut utiliser cet argument pour faire sauter des informations, même quand elles sont neutres », confie Bader sans détour.
Caroline, l'interroge franchement : « Comment peut-on feindre la neutralité ? » Réponse : il ne faut surtout pas se présenter comme militant. Pour « crédibiliser un compte », explique Bader, il faut avoir un profil lisse, dénué d'accointances trop flagrantes avec le sujet afin d'influencer subtilement le narratif. « Tu fais un peu de Palestine, hop, tu fais une petite pause, tu fais une modification ou deux, tac-tac, et tu reviens sur la Palestine après. »  
 
https://www.lepoint.fr/societe/comm [...] 164_23.php

la libération de 33 otages, dont des femmes, des enfants et des hommes de plus de 50 ans. Ils seront libérés par petits groupes, sous 42 jours, en échange de centaines de prisonniers palestiniens détenus en Israël.

Le camp de réfugiés palestiniens de Balata près de Naplouse en Cisjordanie.
 
Pendant 10 jours, du 25 juin au 5 juillet, une délégation de 11 personnes conduite par le Maire de Mauléon a exprimé le soutien très fort de la Soule au courageux peuple palestinien qui lutte avec détermination contre l’apartheid. Ce peuple qui revendique un état Palestinien avec Jérusalem Est comme Capitale, en application stricte des accords internationaux, en particulier les accords d’Oslo.
 
Nous avons donc rencontré un peuple palestinien fier, luttant pour ses droits légitimes.
 
J’ai conclu en m’adressant à Monsieur le Premier Ministre de l’Autorité Palestinienne : « Monsieur le Premier Ministre, si être terroriste, c’est soutenir le juste combat que vous menez pour la paix et la liberté, oui je suis fier d’être terroriste ».
 
 
 
Deux projets de jumelage qui peuvent sembler être différents, mais un fil rouge les relie, la paix, la liberté…
 
L’amitié et la solidarité.