Bibi pushes back against pressure from left and right and from international leaders to close an agreement. Cautious optimism but big gaps remain and the Hamas response remains a wild card.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, facing growing dissent within his government, delivered a firm defense of the ongoing ceasefire negotiations with Hamas. The proposed deal, which hinges on the release of hostages in exchange for a temporary cessation of hostilities, has sparked intense debate among Israeli leaders and the public.

In a statement today, Netanyahu addressed the criticism head-on, emphasizing that the negotiations were driven by both humanitarian concerns and critical security imperatives. “This is a matter of give and take, not give and give,” Netanyahu asserted, countering claims that Israel was conceding too much without securing enough in return. He further clarified that the deal under discussion includes provisions that are “absolutely critical to Israel’s security,” ensuring that any pause in military operations would not compromise the country’s ability to defend itself. Key sticking points are the identities of hostages and prisoners to be released and control of key security routes in the center and southern edge of the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu’s remarks come as the proposed 42-day first phase of the ceasefire deal, which would involve the phased release of hostages held by Hamas, enters a critical phase of negotiation. Under the deal, women, elderly and injured hostages would be released first, in what Netanyahu described as a painful but necessary step to bring the captives home.

However, the Prime Minister’s stance has not gone unchallenged. Within his own cabinet, key figures from the far-right Otzma Yehudit and Religious Zionism parties have voiced strong opposition. They argue that the ceasefire risks empowering Hamas, allowing the group to regroup and rearm during the pause in hostilities.

Bezalel Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionism party, warned that the deal could have long-term repercussions for Israel’s security. “We are conceding too much without sufficient guarantees. Hamas is being given the opportunity to strengthen, while we are being asked to rely on promises that may never be fulfilled,” Smotrich said in a statement.

Itamar Ben Gvir, head of Otzma Yehudit, was even more critical, suggesting that the deal undermines Israel’s broader strategic goals. “This agreement plays directly into Hamas’s hands. They get a much-needed break from our military pressure, while we get vague assurances that our security will be maintained,” Ben Gvir argued. He also raised concerns that international pressure could prevent Israel from resuming military operations even if the ceasefire is violated.

Netanyahu, however, dismissed these concerns, insisting that the deal was carefully structured to protect Israel’s security interests. He noted that any ceasefire violations by Hamas would be met with an immediate and forceful response. “The war will continue until all our goals are achieved. This ceasefire is a tactical pause, not a concession. It is designed to bring our people home while maintaining our ability to strike back hard if Hamas steps out of line,” Netanyahu stated.

In addition to internal opposition, the negotiations have been complicated by Hamas’s inconsistent participation in the talks. The group has not sent representatives to recent discussions in Doha and has issued statements suggesting that the deal is not yet close to fruition. This has raised doubts about whether the ceasefire will be finalized and, if it is, whether it will hold.

Diplomats from the United States, Qatar, and Egypt, who are mediating the talks, are working to bridge the remaining gaps. The proposed deal, if successful, would mark a significant step in de-escalating the conflict, though it is clear that the road to a final agreement remains fraught with challenges. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is heading back to Israel to apply pressure on Netanyahu, hoping to show progress before the Democrat National Convention.