In recent days, it seems as if Prime Minister Netanyahu is hardening his positions regarding the negotiations for the deal, and other factors are seemingly more conciliatory. However, if we dive into the details, it seems that in practice the differences are not that great. In the state camp, they claim that Netanyahu is deliberately trying to create the impression of differences between them in their approaches.
So what are the differences in approach between the parties? While Netanyahu talks about releasing hostages at a ratio of 1 to 3 prisoners – a continuation of the previous humanitarian deal, Gantz and Eisenkot did not publicly talk about numbers. It can be assumed that the difference between the key they are piercing with and what Netanyahu is piercing with is minor, and certainly not one that breaks a deal.
Another small difference – Netanyahu believes that military pressure should be applied and wait for Hamas to relent, and for that reason refuses further meetings in negotiations with all the mediators. Gantz and Eisenkot also do not believe that their foot should be taken off the gas, they are talking about an active approach, to initiate another proposal, to perhaps allow space A new set of agreements, except that unlike Netanyahu, Gantz and Eisenkot believe that the channel of talks should be kept open, that everything should be done and every stone left unturned.
Officials in the state camp claim that Netanyahu is deliberately trying to create a distinction between himself and Gantz and Eisenkot and present them as weaklings, as those who are willing to pay heavy prices, and if it was up to them – the war would have stopped. According to the sources in the state camp, Netanyahu isolates Gantz and Eisenkot from decision-making and deliberately hardens positions in order to present his camp as seemingly stubborn in front of theirs.
Did you find a language mistake?