Hamas criticises new Gaza ceasefire proposal as favouring Netanyahu’s conditions
The group stated that the proposal aligns with Netanyahu's demands, which include rejecting a permanent ceasefire, maintaining control over the Netzarim Corridor, Rafah Crossing, and the Philadelphi Corridor, and setting new conditions for the prisoner exchange.
Gaza: Hamas has criticised the new ceasefire proposal for Gaza, presented in Doha last week, as catering to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conditions, particularly his refusal to agree to a permanent ceasefire.
The group claimed the proposal aligns with Netanyahu’s demands, including rejecting a permanent ceasefire, maintaining control over the Netzarim Corridor, Rafah Crossing, and the Philadelphi Corridor, and setting new conditions on the prisoner exchange, which Hamas said hindered the deal’s completion, Xinhua news agency reported.
Hamas accused Netanyahu of “being fully responsible” for the mediators’ failure, obstructing an agreement, and endangering Israeli hostages by “continuing his aggressive actions against Gaza.”
The group reiterated its commitment to the agreement reached on July 2, based on US President Joe Biden’s announcement and a UN Security Council resolution, urging Egyptian and Qatari mediators to enforce the agreed terms.
A new round of Gaza ceasefire negotiations took place in Doha on Thursday and Friday, following which the three mediators issued a joint statement announcing that the talks have made “constructive” progress and that relevant parties would continue their efforts in the coming days to negotiate the details of the deal’s implementation.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu‘s office expressed gratitude for the mediators’ efforts and hoped they would lead Hamas to accept the terms of a proposal made in late May.
Meanwhile, Hamas, which did not participate directly, accused Israel of adding new conditions to a previously supported proposal, and accused the US administration of trying to create a “false positive atmosphere,” expressing scepticism about the negotiations’ outcome.
