Gaza cease-fire – who deserves the credit?

Thu Jan 16 2025
Gil Ecker (258 articles)
Gaza cease-fire – who deserves the credit?

The recent cease-fire in Gaza raises questions about the attribution of credit for this development.  On Tuesday, protesters in Tel Aviv rallied for the return of hostages held by Hamas. The conclusion of the cease-fire agreement between Israel and Hamas is significantly influenced by the forthcoming transition of power from President Biden to President-elect Donald Trump, igniting a vigorous discussion regarding the attribution of credit. The nascent agreement, resulting from protracted negotiations, is now under pressure due to the impending transition of the U.S. administration, which has effectively created an unofficial deadline for finalizing the pact, according to insights from current and former U.S. officials.

“A DEAL HAS BEEN REACHED REGARDING THE HOSTAGES IN THE MIDDLE EAST.” They are set to be released imminently. Thank you. On Wednesday, Trump made an announcement via Truth Social, his own social media platform. Biden is expected to discuss the cease-fire during a previously arranged Oval Office speech on Wednesday night, which the White House has characterized as a farewell address. “The conclusion of a presidency serves as a definitive deadline, compelling action with urgency. If we intend to effect change, it must occur promptly, as the future remains uncertain post the 20th,” remarked John Bolton, who held the position of national security adviser during Trump’s initial term.

Israel is increasingly concentrating on curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and is acutely aware that both Biden and Trump are in favor of finalizing the Gaza agreement within the coming week. The contest to determine which American president merits acclaim is underway in Washington and is poised to escalate with the imminent release of nearly three dozen hostages alongside a 42-day cease-fire. According to aides of President Biden, the agreement is rooted in a framework articulated by him last May, a pursuit that has been ongoing for several months. On Tuesday, Biden continued his diplomatic engagement, conversing with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah Al Sisi in a call that followed recent discussions with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani.

Supporters of Trump assert that it was the incoming president who enhanced the likelihood of the agreement. On December 2 of the previous year, he asserted that there would be “ALL HELL TO PAY” should Hamas fail to release the remaining hostages by Inauguration Day. According to an Israeli official, two days prior, Egypt communicated to Israel that Hamas was genuinely prepared to engage in negotiations for a cease-fire. Efforts to revive stalled negotiations intensified, although the official noted that Trump’s threats “added more fuel to the fire.”

Analysts focused on the Middle East, along with certain officials from the Biden administration, contend that the collaborative efforts of both Democratic and Republican factions seem to have propelled the negotiations to their conclusion. “There exists a Trump effect,” remarked Dennis Ross, a former senior official on Middle East matters across both Democratic and Republican administrations. “It is not his threats that swayed Hamas, but rather his insistence on resolving this issue prior to his presidency that resonated with the Qataris, Egyptians, and potentially the Turks—who, both individually and collectively, possess the leverage to exert pressure on Hamas.”

Netanyahu, Ross noted, perceives a reluctance to oppose Trump, thereby granting the incoming president a degree of influence in the bilateral relationship as he embarks on his second term. “However, the Biden administration merits recognition for effectively contributing to the formulation of the agreement,” he stated. The prospective development during a U.S. presidential transition evokes memories of the 1981 accord that liberated American hostages in Iran, coinciding with the transfer of power from a Democratic president to a Republican successor. During the Carter administration, the U.S. Embassy in Tehran was overrun in 1979, resulting in the taking of 52 hostages. Their release coincided with President Reagan’s inaugural address.

Similar to the Iran hostage crisis that unfolded over four decades ago, the expected Gaza accord emerges at a time when the United States is undergoing a significant political transition. However, several significant distinctions exist between the two crises. A notable distinction lies in the collaboration between the Biden and Trump administrations, especially highlighted by the involvement of Steve Witkoff, Trump’s envoy to the Middle East, in the negotiations concerning Gaza.

“This situation differs significantly from that of Carter and Reagan—genuine cooperation was absent, and Khomeini aimed to humiliate Carter by withholding the release of the hostages until after Reagan’s inauguration,” Ross remarked, alluding to Ruhollah Khomeini, the Iranian ayatollah in power during that period. The prospective Gaza accord represents merely a preliminary phase in the pursuit of a comprehensive and more complex resolution to the crisis. Achieving such a resolution necessitates consensus on the governance, security, and reconstruction of Gaza in the event of an Israeli withdrawal.

“There was significant collaboration between Trump and Biden,” remarked Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. Middle East negotiator and a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “However, this does not constitute a resolution of the issue.” This narrative lacks a conventional resolution. During a Tuesday engagement at the Atlantic Council, Secretary of State Antony Blinken highlighted significant challenges that remain, notably the establishment of a viable state for the Palestinians.

“For several months, we have engaged in rigorous collaboration with our partners to formulate a comprehensive post-conflict strategy that would enable Israel to execute a complete withdrawal from Gaza, deter Hamas from re-establishing its presence, and ensure effective governance, security, and reconstruction for Gaza,” stated Blinken. “We will transfer responsibility to the Trump administration for continuation.” At an event hosted on Tuesday by the U.S. Institute of Peace, a research center located in Washington, the current and incoming national security advisers were seated adjacent to one another, indicating a strong alignment in their efforts during the transition period.

However, the extent of consensus between the outgoing and incoming administrations regarding the subsequent measures to stabilize the Middle East remains ambiguous, particularly concerning policies related to Iran, Syria, and the Palestinians. Implementing a more constrained cease-fire in Gaza, as noted by Biden’s national security adviser Jake Sullivan, would present numerous challenges. He conveyed optimism regarding the possibility of a deal being finalized prior to January 20, yet he warned that the subsequent phases of implementation and execution remain critical challenges.

Mike Waltz, the incoming national security adviser under Trump, emphasized the necessity of resolving the Gaza conflict and fostering a “finally reformed” Palestinian Authority, outlining the administration’s perspective on the issue. However, he voiced doubts regarding the capacity to temper extremist movements within the region. “One can aspire to reform the next generation,” he remarked, “yet there are instances when one must resort to placing bombs on foreheads.”

Gil Ecker

Gil Ecker

Gil Ecker is Charting & Technical Analyst. He has more than 10 years experience of Global Stock Markets.