Cease-fire Between Israel, Hamas Draws Mixed Responses from Arab Experts
Arab countries officially support the truce, but experts express divided opinions on the conflict’s resolution
Most of the Arab world was in favor of the Israel-Hamas truce mediated by Qatar, Egypt, and the US. Additionally, many of the countries issued statements supporting the cease-fire, which included the release of Israeli hostages in exchange for relief aid, fuel trucks, and 150 Palestinian women and children in Israeli prisons.
Arab experts’ opinions were divided, with some viewing the truce as beneficial to both parties and others seeing it as a loss for the Palestinians after nearly 50 days of war.
I would like to express my welcome to the success of the Egyptian-Qatari-American mediation in reaching an agreement to implement a humanitarian truce in the Gaza Strip and an exchange of detainees held by both parties, and I affirm the continuation of the Egyptian efforts made to reach final and sustainable solutions that achieve justice, impose peace, and guarantee the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people
Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi took to the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, to express his satisfaction with the agreement:
“I would like to express my welcome to the success of the Egyptian-Qatari-American mediation in reaching an agreement to implement a humanitarian truce in the Gaza Strip and an exchange of detainees held by both parties, and I affirm the continuation of the Egyptian efforts made to reach final and sustainable solutions that achieve justice, impose peace, and guarantee the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.”
Saudi Arabia, through a brief statement from the Foreign Ministry, also welcomed the humanitarian truce agreement, “appreciating the Qatari, Egyptian and American efforts for this purpose, calling for a comprehensive cessation of military operations, the protection and relief of civilians, and the liberation of detainees and prisoners.”
The Jordanian Foreign Ministry welcomed “the efforts that led to reaching a humanitarian truce agreement in the Gaza Strip,” praising the efforts made by the State of Qatar in partnership with Egypt and the United States of America, according to a statement published on its official X page.
Jordan’s statement called for “[the] truce to be a step that leads to a complete cessation of the ongoing war on the Gaza Strip, and to contribute to stopping the escalation and the targeting and forced displacement of Palestinians.” In comparison, the UAE announced its welcome of the agreement to release the hostages and the humanitarian truce in the Gaza Strip, according to reports by the Emirates News Agency (WAM).
Abu Dhabi expressed “hope for a permanent cease-fire” stressing the need to return to negotiations to achieve a two-state solution and establish an independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, according to WAM.
The Bahraini Foreign Ministry expressed support for the agreement to establish a humanitarian truce in the Gaza Strip for four days, subject to extension, allowing the exchange of hostages and detainees, including women and children, and the delivery of humanitarian relief and medical aid, such as fuel. The government also praised the joint mediation efforts by the State of Qatar. Egypt, and the US.
In addition, Bahrain encouraged the international community to push for diplomatic efforts to reach a permanent cease-fire, release hostages and detainees, deliver humanitarian aid in a complete, safe, and sustainable manner, rebuild the stricken areas in the Gaza Strip from health, educational and residential facilities, and revive the just and comprehensive peace process with the people’s access to peace.
The Omani Foreign Ministry also congratulated the State of Qatar for reaching a humanitarian truce agreement in Gaza, exchanging a number of civilian prisoners, and allowing the entry of larger numbers of humanitarian convoys and relief aid into the Gaza Strip.
The truce agreement is an opportunity to save the Gaza Strip from complete collapse after nearly 50 days of war.
Saif Al-Jabri, an expert on Palestinian affairs, confirmed to The Media Line that “the truce agreement is an opportunity to save the Gaza Strip from complete collapse after nearly 50 days of war.”
“This agreement not only allows for the exchange of hostages, a temporary cease-fire, and the entry of humanitarian aid, it also alleviates the hostage crisis held by the Hamas movement,” Al-Jabri noted.
“In my view, the agreement will not end the issue in its entirety,” he said. “Israel is determined to destroy the Hamas movement, or at least its offensive capabilities, and so the war may continue after the end of this agreement.”
Al-Jabri went on to say, “The agreement contained a hidden party, namely Iran, who stood on behalf of the Hamas movement to reach this agreement. It is the country which fully influences the movement’s opinion, and therefore, this agreement came after Tehran’s approval from the other side.”
Tamer Anwar, a Palestinian journalist residing abroad, strongly criticized accepting the agreement and told The Media Line, “We are back to point zero from my point of view. The agreement is about the hostages, and it is the last pressure card that Hamas has.”
“After about 50 days of war, we’ve reached a truce agreement to go back to Square One before the war. Where fuel, food, and medicine trucks entered, and the hostages were released. So why did Hamas go to war in the first place if it did not have more to gain in this war?” Anwar questioned.
“We are the losing party in this war. We have more than 12,000 martyrs, hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure losses, and northern Gaza has been almost completely destroyed,” he said. “Now the truce agreement will free the detained hostages and the Palestinians will not have any other chance.”
Thaer Al-Ani, a former Iraqi soldier, told The Media Line, “Perhaps the Arab people have an opinion that the truce is good for the entry of aid, but from my military point of view, it is an early declaration of loss for Hamas.”
Al-Ani explained, “The truce agreement will not stop the Israeli bombing. It is just a temporary halt for several hours. Israel freed the hostages. This is a concession on [Israel’s] part, as it was seeking to liberate the hostages through a military operation, but Hamas is also a loser in this war.”
However, “the Palestinians are the biggest losers so far,” he admitted. “The truce agreement will give the Palestinians some time to heal their wounds, but the civilian losses on their part were the largest.”
He added that “Hamas did not make its calculations accurately from the beginning. It waged the war and did not have sufficient strength to wage it, nor the negotiating papers. Instead of achieving progress, it began to retreat. It lost the lands of northern Gaza, and now the hostages.”
“Of course, Israel will take information from the hostages about their places of detention,” Al-Ani acknowledged. “Their headquarters, their shape, and their quality. This gives [Israel] an advantage, and it will be able to obtain more information about Hamas’s secret headquarters.”
We hope that the truce will continue and that it will be comprehensive and according to correct principles, as the people of northern Gaza return to their homes, or what remains of them
Nasser Al-Nasser, a Kuwaiti political analyst, told The Media, “We hope that the truce will continue and that it will be comprehensive and according to correct principles, as the people of northern Gaza return to their homes, or what remains of them.”
“This truce will reveal the extent of the disaster taking place in the Gaza Strip, where there are still bodies that have not been recovered,” he added.
Al-Nasser went on to say that the Gulf states “support this truce” and now “a great deal of work is being done to ensure that this truce continues, and the war stops.”
He explained that the first truce is a prelude to the comprehensive truce in previous wars. But there must be a comprehensive agreement for an integrated solution to the Palestinian issue.
“This American administration was not a strong party to the truce, and perhaps if it had been another administration, the truce would have lasted longer, and its results would have been better,” he concluded.
