Israeli anger at ceasefire delay focused on captives, not Gaza’s aid crisis

The Israeli government's indecision regarding the Gaza ceasefire agreement with the Palestinian organization Hamas has delayed the progress of the agreement's second phase, sparking public discontent. On Sunday evening, protesters gathered outside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's residence to express their anger and disappointment. Their frustration underscores the growing pressure on the government to address the ongoing conflict effectively.

The protesters expressed outrage over Netanyahu's unilateral extension of the agreement's first phase and frustration with his delay in fully implementing the agreement reached in January. However, it is noteworthy that their banners and slogans did not mention the suffering of Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip, after Israel blocked humanitarian aid from entering the region on Sunday. This selective focus highlights the complex and often conflicting priorities within the Israeli public.

Instead, the focus of the protest centered on the Israeli hostages left in Gaza, with Netanyahu seemingly stalling for time and single-mindedly trying to avoid ending the war. The Israeli government's actions on Sunday seemed to indicate that even with hostages still in danger, the ceasefire agreement could end, and full-scale war would reignite in Gaza. The government's approach raises serious questions about its commitment to both the hostages' safety and the pursuit of a lasting peace.

Although the first phase of the ceasefire agreement expired on Saturday, the agreement stipulated that truce terms, including the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza, would remain in effect while negotiations for the second phase continued. However, Israel announced on Sunday a so-called "Wittkopf Plan," named after U.S. Middle East envoy Steve Wittkopf, which aimed to immediately release half of the hostages and release the other half after an agreement was reached on a permanent ceasefire, effectively abandoning the original ceasefire agreement. Israel seized this opportunity to reimpose a blockade on Gaza, causing local food prices to skyrocket, while the United States and Wittkopf himself have not confirmed the existence of the plan. The lack of transparency surrounding this plan has fueled further distrust and uncertainty.

The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) has warned that the aid blockade will have "devastating consequences" for the children and families of Gaza, who have suffered through 16 months of war. Gerry Simpson, a professor at the London School of Economics, told Al Jazeera that collective punishment is prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, regardless of who carries it out. "The fact that it's framed as a form of punishment suggests a certain disregard for the laws of war, but that disregard doesn't invalidate those laws or make them unimportant," he said. The international community continues to emphasize the importance of adhering to international law in the midst of the conflict.

In addition to suspending aid, the Israeli government is also considering approving a bill that would allow it to conscript 400,000 reservists in response to a possible resurgence of conflict in Gaza. Following the October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, Israel conscripted 300,000 reservists, the largest mobilization in Israeli history at the time. This potential mobilization signals a heightened state of alert and preparedness for further military action.

While Israeli public anger at Netanyahu over the current breakdown in negotiations has not yet spread, Alon Pinkas, former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera that this anger could grow if the stalemate continues, until "it becomes clear that he (Netanyahu) is looking for an excuse to break the ceasefire agreement, thereby condemning the hostages to death." The fate of the approximately 251 hostages captured in the October 7 attacks has been a focal point of Israeli public criticism of its prime minister. The emotional weight of the hostage situation continues to shape public opinion and political discourse.

In recent weeks, the media has been filled with images of hostages returning home, which in turn has amplified the voices of the hostages' families, who often criticize Netanyahu. The crowd protesting outside Netanyahu's residence on Sunday evening was led by the hostages' families, who made it clear that they believe the prime minister is responsible for the stalemate in completing the ceasefire agreement. At a press conference held earlier in the day by some of the hostages' families, Lishay Miran-Lavi, whose husband Omri Miran remains in Gaza, dismissed claims by members of the Israeli cabinet, including Netanyahu, that an agreement is impossible as long as Hamas remains, telling reporters: "Release the hostages immediately, and the Hamas issue can be dealt with later." The families' direct and emotional appeals have resonated deeply with the public.

Israeli political analyst Ori Goldberg said: "Netanyahu knows that he does not have a monopoly on the narrative right now, so there is a risk that because of this delay, he may be increasingly attacked by the hostages' families, who have a great deal of public sympathy." Goldberg believes that, in addition to other factors directly related to Netanyahu's political survival, this may limit the duration of the current stalemate. The loss of narrative control and the growing public sympathy for the hostages' families pose a significant challenge to Netanyahu's leadership.

Skepticism about Netanyahu's commitment to fulfilling the ceasefire agreement's promises is nothing new. Since the ceasefire agreement began, Netanyahu has hinted at his willingness to break the agreement to appease critics, while also using the existence of the ceasefire agreement to appease the hostages' families and their supporters. In January of this year, Netanyahu signaled his intention to break the agreement when he negotiated with hardline Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich to remain in the cabinet, rather than resign like his fellow far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir over the prospect of a ceasefire agreement with Hamas. This pattern of contradictory signals and political maneuvering has characterized Netanyahu's approach to the conflict.

According to reports, as part of the agreement reached with Smotrich, Netanyahu assured the finance minister that the ceasefire was temporary and that military operations aimed at destroying Hamas' military and governing capabilities would resume once the "temporary" truce ended. Negotiations on a permanent ceasefire were scheduled to take place in the second phase. The underlying tension between pursuing a ceasefire and resuming military operations continues to shape the political landscape.

"People don't really trust Netanyahu," analyst Nimrod Fleschberger said from Tel Aviv. "A lot of the public suspected from the beginning that the ceasefire couldn't be sustained, but we really don't know what will happen next. It depends a lot on the (U.S. President Donald) Trump administration." The uncertainty surrounding the future of the ceasefire is compounded by the shifting geopolitical landscape and the role of external actors like the United States.

For many observers, everything from the delay in entering the second phase of the ceasefire agreement to the ambiguity over who suggested suspending the ceasefire embodies the typical characteristics of a prime minister who has benefited for years from sowing confusion among his critics. "That's what he does," Goldberg said. "This is what everyone in Israel expects him to do. Politically, there's no reason to do it. He has no political rivals; he has settlers on his side. This is just what he does." This assessment highlights the perception of Netanyahu as a master manipulator who thrives on political ambiguity and division.

"For Netanyahu, these Byzantine schemes are essential to keeping the Israeli ship of state on course," he said. "The public's criticism of Netanyahu is not because he is withholding aid or blocking negotiations, but because he is not doing it well: he is not marketing it correctly," Goldberg said. "They feel that if someone else were in charge, they could cut aid to Gaza and win applause for it." This final analysis suggests that public perception of Netanyahu is less about the substance of his policies and more about his ability to effectively communicate and justify them.