Gaza: will ceasefires pave the way for peace?
In light of the deepening hunger crisis in Gaza, Israel has agreed to 'humanitarian' ceasefires. This is intended to enable aid deliveries via safe corridors. Large convoys of trucks and airdrops of supplies are now reaching the starving population. Commentators debate the potential impact of Israel's concessions.
Perhaps a unique opportunity
There may now be the prospect of a face-saving end to the war for Israel, writes Polityka:
“Israel now has the chance to at least partially restore its reputation. This will require a coordinated and fair system for the distribution of humanitarian aid. But that alone is not enough. Perhaps this is a unique opportunity for Israel to end the war, secure the hostages' release and somewhat regain its international reputation. Gaza's inhabitants are still paying with their blood for the crimes committed by Hamas in Israel on 7 October.”
A ceasefire is still a long way off
According to Kristiana Ludwig, the Süddeutsche Zeitung's correspondent for Israel and the Palestinian territories, it's still too early to hope for an end to the war:
“Because the new aid corridors have already drawn massive criticism within Israel's government. US President Donald Trump, whose voice is particularly important in this conflict, has also made a ceasefire less likely with his angry statements against Hamas in the past week. Supplying the civilian population of Gaza with food should be a matter of course - not doing so would be a crime. And that alone won't alleviate their suffering, because most of their homes, their hospitals and Gaza's infrastucure have been destroyed, and Israel will continue to bomb them.”
No prospect of improvement
Der Standard sees no sign of the vicious circle of hunger and blockades ending:
“As things stand, there is of course far too little aid to relieve the great suffering in Gaza. For this to be the case, aid would have to be made available through all possible channels. But this is unlikely given that Israel is showing no signs of yielding. The government continues to deny that there is a hunger crisis in Gaza. It also claims that Hamas is intercepting aid supplies in order to sell them and use them to finance its terror business. ... There is reason to fear that aid will be suspended at the first opportunity, as has happened several times since Israel's invasion of the Gaza Strip. And then the mass starvation in Gaza will start all over again.”
Israel's moral obligation
From a moral perspective, Israel has far more to lose than Hamas in this war, Göteborgs-Posten emphasises:
“Hamas cares little about civilian casualties on its own side. In fact, it intentionally positions its military facilities near schools and hospitals. ... However, it is a fallacy to suggest that Israel should disregard humanitarian considerations just because Hamas does so. Of course, we must hold Israel to higher moral standards than Hamas. The latter is an Islamist terrorist organisation. Israel is a country that is rightly considered part of Western civilisation. Israel bears a moral responsibility for its response to Hamas tactics.”