Front Burner - Israel rejects ceasefire deal, pushes into Gaza’s last refuge

Episode Date: May 13, 2024

There were scenes of celebration in Gaza last Monday, as word spread that Hamas had accepted the terms of an Egyptian-Qatari ceasefire proposal.But the same day, Israel rejected the deal. Its military has since ordered more evacuations and pushed further into Rafah, considered a last refuge for over 1 million Gazans displaced by the war.  So what would it take for Israel to agree to a ceasefire? If it wants the safety of hostages, why didn’t it take a deal to release them? And what could the human cost of this last push for Israel’s “total victory” be? Julian Borger is the Guardian's world affairs editor.For transcripts of Front Burner, please visit: https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/transcriptsTranscripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Hi, I'm Jamie Poisson. So you're listening to the sound of Gazans celebrating outside of Al-Aqsa Hospital last Monday. They just heard that Hamas had agreed to the terms of a ceasefire deal arranged by Egypt, Qatar and the United States. That in phases would see each of the remaining hostages return to Israel and a withdrawal of Israeli troops from Palestinian territory. But that hope was short-lived.

By the afternoon, the government of Israel had officially rejected the deal, and the next day, Israel seized the Rafah border crossing, a key artery of aid. Rafah has been one of the last places for Gazans to flee Israel's military, with more than one million displaced people seeking refuge there. But Israel now says its incursion will continue into the southernmost tip of Gaza. And on Saturday, it ordered more areas of Rafah to evacuate into an even narrower corridor. So what would it take for Israel to agree to a ceasefire? If it wants the safety of hostages, why didn't it take the deal to release them? And what could the human cost of Israel's, quote, total victory be?

I'm talking to The Guardian World Affairs Editor, Julian Borger. Julian, hi. Always a pleasure to have you. Thank you so much for being here. Good to be with you. So I think the most helpful place to start is a week ago, there was a proposed ceasefire that Hamas announced it would accept. And can you tell me what the terms of that deal was? We don't know exactly. And there were reports in the Egyptian press giving an outline, and that is probably a fair reflection of what the Egyptians had booked forward in terms of a gradual release of hostages for the first period that would include a ceasefire and release of a multiple of that number of hostages in terms of Palestinian detainees being released from Israel. The

sticking point over a long period, over many weeks, has been whether this initial ceasefire would be made permanent and at what point would it turn into a permanent ceasefire, with Hamas and Israel having very different points of view. What seems to have happened over the weekend is that Hamas accepted a form of words, a fudge over that issue. But there were details in what Hamas had accepted that had been put forward by the Egyptians that it seems like the Israelis had not been consulted on.

And this is where the breakdown was. These fire talks between Israel and Hamas are once again breaking down. And just in the last four hours, the Israeli army started telling Palestinians to temporarily evacuate parts of Rafah. And from the Israeli side, just tell me a little bit more about why they rejected it. And then also, who is responsible for rejecting it, right? Like, does it come down to President Benjamin Netanyahu? So the organ that decides on this is the war cabinet, which is Netanyahu, Benny Gantz, and Yoav Galant, the defense minister,

and Gantz being a minister without portfolio. That's the central decision-making body in Israel. Now, as for what it is that Israel is objecting, because they've described it as being a very long way from their requirements, we're not entirely sure. There are bits and pieces have come out. I don't know to what extent they're accurate. One was that Hamas wanted to include repatriation of dead bodies in the early hostage releases. So that would inevitably leave more live hostages behind after the initial phase of the ceasefire.

And there's also the question of to what extent Israel would have a veto on the Palestinian detainees that were released, whether they would be able to say, no, he or she can't be released. And that reportedly was one of the sticking points as well. Speaking for the first time about these talks, the Israeli prime minister said their opponents' expectations were unacceptable. While Israel showed willingness, Hamas remained entrenched in its extreme positions. And on top of it, their demand that we withdraw all our forces from the Strip, end the war, and leave Hamas intact. The state of Israel cannot accept this. Politically, why might it be difficult for Netanyahu to accept a deal like the one that Hamas agreed to?

Netanyahu faces a very hard constraint in his cabinet, his coalition, because there are right-wingers in his coalition who have said quite plainly that they will walk out of the coalition if a deal is done with Hamas. And that would probably bring down his government. And that is something that neither the moderates in his coalition nor the Americans can do. And so the right has a disproportionate influence over him. And so this is really a kind of hard constraint on his readiness to do a deal. But after seven months of a war in which Israel's army pledged to destroy Hamas, a ceasefire deal that fails to accomplish that risks breaking Israel's wartime coalition government. Israel will send negotiators to talks but won't stop fighting yet.

For their part, why do you think Hamas agreed to the deal last week? Again, it's impossible to go inside the mind of Yahya Sinwa, the Hamas chief inside Gaza who's in hiding somewhere, but from all accounts is making the key decisions. But it is quite likely that the threat of an IDF offensive on Rafah could have played a role. Certainly the time of it suggested that the imminence of that attack with the massing of Israeli forces opposite the south of Gaza, where Rafa is, might have concentrated his mind and made him make concessions that he previously hadn't. In Israel, what has the reaction been like? How have the relatives of the hostages reacted to the government essentially passing on an opportunity to bring at least some of their loved ones home.

They've been out there demonstrating. They've consistently been demonstrating against Netanyahu. They are very suspicious of him. For many thousands of Israelis, the unacceptable thing here is their prime minister. They think he's got his priorities wrong. prime minister. They think he's got his priorities wrong. Stalling on a deal to get back the hostages as he sets about eliminating Hamas. Basically, the Israeli people are hostages to the right-wing government. The people of Gaza are hostages to the Hamas. And basically, there has to be a way to overcome that. They believe that he has an incentive to keep this war going because when it's over, then the questions will be asked

of who's responsible for the failings that led to the 7th of October Hamas attack. So they believe that Netanyahu is deliberately not doing a deal because he wants to stay in power. I say to the leaders of the world, no amount of pressure, no decision by any international forum will stop Israel from defending itself. You know, you talked about the imminent attack on Rafah before Hamas agreed to the ceasefire, but immediately following Israel's rejection of it, what did we see Israel doing in Gaza? They did two things.

First, they ordered out residents of an eastern part of Rafah, and they also moved in and took the Palestinian side of the Rafah crossing into Egypt. Israel announced its troops had taken control of the Gaza side of the Rafah crossing, the only one it did not control. Israel has also imposed a naval blockade on Gaza for years. The UN says the shutting of the two southern crossings starved Gaza of the scant humanitarian aid it had been receiving. So a very decisive, symbolic and also potentially effective move because the Rafah crossing was one of the sources of income of Hamas. You know, they controlled Gaza.

They still control the Gazan side of that crossing and would take informal and formal excise customs on people and goods moving through. And what about the significance of taking that crossing on aid right now? What did we see after they took it? Well, it's closed now to aid. But more importantly, Kerem Shalom is also effectively closed to aid. By late last week, the overwhelming bulk of aid has been crossing Kerem Shalom as opposed to Rafah. And so that's the greatest loss.

Officially, Kerem Shalom is open, but the fact that there is fighting going on, there's damage to the roads because of that fighting, and there's a very murky security situation in the area, means that aid, humanitarian assistance isn't getting past the Gerem Shalom gate at all. And that's meant for some considerable amount of of time, nothing or almost nothing is getting into Gaza. So I mentioned in the intro that there are a million people in Rafah right now. And are we getting any signals that Israel is going to push further into Rafah beyond the crossing? Yes, they've ordered more evacuations closer to the heart of Rafah.

ordered more evacuations closer to the heart of Rafah. You're getting already more than 100,000 people fleeing to places where the conditions of life are very precarious. And so you're getting to the beginning of this humanitarian disaster that so many aid agencies and the UN have been warning about. Around 100,000 Palestinians are moving north from Rafah, yet humanitarian partners have no tents or food stores left in South Gaza. A massive ground attack in Rafah would lead to an epic humanitarian disaster and pull the plug on our efforts to support people as famine looms. Exodus, from what most Gazan had come to see as the last refuge, last haven, and they're fleeing to places like Al-Muassi, which is on the beach, which is a mess with very few permanent structures,

no water supply, very restricted food and shelter. So you're beginning to see the situation that the aid agencies have warned about for so long beginning now to take shape. Since last Monday, how have the U.S. and President Joe Biden reacted to what has been going on in Rafah? Well, it was revealed that the U.S. had put a hold on a delivery of heavy bombs the week before, as it became obvious that the Netanyahu government was going to proceed with Rafale. They put a hold on a shipment of 3,500 bombs, 2,000 pound bombs, which is a massive bomb, and 500 pound bombs, which is also fairly big when it's dropped on a residential area. They put a hold on that. And then Joe Biden himself went on CNN and said publicly,

we are going to put a hold on, we're going to stop the flow of more weapons if you go into Rafah. Civilians have been killed in Gaza as a consequence of those bombs and other ways in which they go after population centres. I made it clear that if they go into Rafah, I'm not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities, to deal with that problem.

Which is a big, big step for a U.S. president to take historically when it comes to Israel. The last president who put a hold on the flow of the arms supplies to Israel was Ronald Reagan. Julian, do you get the sense that Israel is concerned about what the U.S. is doing here? Are they worried about losing support of the U.S. here enough to influence how far Israel goes in Rafah? There is clearly unease. They reacted with a great deal of anger. The members of the right of the government coalition, one of the members put out a tweet suggesting that Hamas loved Biden for doing this. Netanyahu himself was very defiant. He used sort of Churchillian language to say,

we'll stand alone and we'll fight with fingernails if necessary. If we need to stand alone, we will stand alone. I've said that if necessary, we will fight with our fingernails, but we have much more than fingernails. And with that same strength of spirit, with God's help, together we will win. So, an outward show of defiance. But the Israeli military is concerned, obviously, by this. They have more than enough to reduce Rafata rubble. But their concern is the war after. And what they're concerned

with is if there is a war in the north with Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hezbollah, far better armed militia than Hamas, over 100,000 rockets and missiles and so on. And so the IDF is concerned about depleted weapons stocks with that in mind. For his part, Biden has an election coming this year. And how much do you think that's influencing what he's doing right now vis-a-vis Israel and stopping the flow of some weapons to Israel? Well, the conventional wisdom really before he did this, and I talked to lots of sort of pundits on US politics, most were convinced that Biden would never do this, because he'd already alienated the left of his party, wouldn't get them back. But he would alienate the center if he stopped weapons supplies to Israel, because it would just be a bad look that Netanyahu and the Republicans would go

after him in a way that they have, which is to portray him as leaving Israel, the great ally, defenseless in the face of terrorism and the threat from Iran and so on, especially in the wake of an Iranian missile attack on Israel. And so there was an element of surprise that Biden not only held up the delivery of these bombs, but also went on air and took responsibility for this decision himself and warned publicly that there would be more to come. on CBC Gem, brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about

money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income. That's not a typo, 50%. That's because money is confusing. In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. Just search for Money for Cops. I know since October 7th, Netanyahu has based Israel's campaign on two major points. One is the safe return of all hostages.

The other is what he has regularly referred to as total victory over Hamas. And do we have a sense here of what the plan is on Israel's side? You know, have they made clear what they're trying to achieve and like strategically what total victory looks like to them at this point? Yes. There are four battalions left of Hamas's fighting wing supposedly in Rafah. And the aim is to destroy those remaining battalions as fighting units. Obviously, independent flighters would survive and scatter. But the military aim is that these would no longer be cohesive, coherent fighting units. That is the military aim. Now, would that mean the destruction of Hamas as an idea, as a force? Obviously not. But it is the definition of the military objectives,

to really cripple them as a fighting force. Having said that, though, you know, I was just reading that over the weekend, there was fighting in northern Gaza and parts of the Strip where Israel had like previously claimed victory over Hamas. And I saw an interview on Sunday with Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, and he told Face the Nation that Hamas was already coming back in parts of Gaza. So what does that signal to you? But ultimately, in terms of destroying Hamas, and the idea of destroying Hamas is, and was from the outset, an illusion, because they have fighters, they have galvanized support because of the nature of the Israeli military operations in Gaza, and the destruction of people's widespread wholesale destruction of cities. There's also galvanized support for Hamas on the West Bank, where they were previously a small political force. So to a certain extent, the nature of this war has backfired in that Hamas remains

still a potent force, still presenting itself as a governing body inside Gaza. In a way, that war aim was always, to some extent, an illusion, especially in the absence of a plan of governance of Gaza in the aftermath of the war. And that has always been lacking from the side of the Netanyahu government, they refuse really to countenance a discussion of some sort of Palestinian governance after the war. Yeah. And just from the Palestinians, obviously, their long-term goal is an end to Israel's occupation of Palestinian territory and the recognition of a Palestinian state, occupation of Palestinian territory and the recognition of a Palestinian state,

which I see that the UN effectively overwhelmingly backed last week in a pretty historic vote. Today, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly in favor of a Palestinian bid to become a full member. It has recommended this now to be considered by the UN Security Council. 143 nations supported the motion. But is there any prospect of this at all at this point? Is this even remotely on the horizon? No, it's not. And partly because there isn't a meaningful constituency for it in Israel. And it will need Israeli compliance, obviously obviously in the creation of the state because

they're occupying the territory on which it would be built. And at the moment in Israeli public opinion and in the Israeli political arena, it's hard to see a coalition of forces that would not only agree to the creation of Palestine and the state on the outset, but follow through with it. Because to follow through, an Israeli government would have to dismantle large settlements inside the West Bank. And that is hard to see given the present political realities in Israel. And just Julian, one final question before we go. I'm just really curious to hear your thoughts on this. What do you think the long term consequences of continuing this war could be for Israel in the international community? Israel will become a pariah. And you saw that at

the UN with that vote. There were nine votes against the motion of the creation of a Palestinian state. It's losing friends around the world. It would take a lot of time for Israel to recover from this. Diplomatically, it was a very significant rubricon that was crossed by Biden in cutting the arms supplies to Israel. Obviously, if Trump wins the next election, that arms supply will be restored. But nevertheless, the president and now a recent precedent has been set for conditionality that was before a taboo. So Israel has suffered a lot in terms of, or brought on itself, really, a lot of diplomatic damage. And its international standing may never recover. All right. Julian, thank you. It is always so excellent to hear you talk through this stuff.

We really appreciate it. It was a pleasure. It was a pleasure. All right, that is all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks so much for listening and talk to you tomorrow. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.