Understanding Biden’s proposal for a Gaza ceasefire

As U.S. President Joe Biden stepped up to the microphone on Friday, he checked his watch before beginning his speech, joking that he wanted to make sure it was afternoon. Given that he was almost an hour late to the speech, someone might have told him behind the scenes to wait until it was close to the beginning of Shabbat in Israel. That way, far-right, and Sabbath-observant, ministers such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir would have to wait a day to respond to a speech they certainly did not want to hear.

Nor was Biden’s speech one that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could have been very pleased with, although he must have known it was coming well in advance.

Biden spent the bulk of his talk presenting what he called “a new Israeli proposal” for ending the slaughter in Gaza. On one hand, the plan he presented was remarkably similar to the one Israel rejected in early May, subsequently claiming that Hamas had “altered” it when they accepted the idea. 

This raises the question of why Israel would suddenly accept it now. Part of the answer came shortly after Biden’s speech, when both houses of Congress, and the full bipartisan leadership, issued a formal invitation for Netanyahu to address a joint session in Congress, likely at the end of August or early September. 

The politics around all of this are cynical, but there can be little doubt that the mass demonstrations around the United States and Europe, throughout the Arab world, and even in Israel pressed all the parties involved in talks to at least get a real offer on the table. Still, those same politics may still mean Israel’s onslaught will continue.

What we know of the proposal

Like the deal on the table a few weeks ago, the proposal Biden put forth is divided into three stages. 

In Stage One, there would be a complete ceasefire for six weeks. Israel would withdraw from “all populated areas of Gaza”; Hamas and other militant groups would release some hostages, including women, elderly and wounded, in exchange for the release of “hundreds” of Palestinian prisoners; Palestinian civilians can return to their homes anywhere in Gaza; and at least 600 trucks of humanitarian aid would enter Gaza every day.

Some crucial details remain unclear. Perhaps the most important one is what Israel withdrawing from “all populated areas of Gaza” means. If Israel will not be engaging in any military operations, then the presence of troops seems perfunctory. And, if Palestinians can return anywhere in Gaza, that leaves precious little “unpopulated” land in the tiny, overcrowded Strip. 

Stage Two is somewhat open-ended, and the details are supposed to be worked out during Stage One. Biden did explicitly say that if those negotiations were not complete by six weeks, the ceasefire would be extended until they were. 

The second stage would see an agreement on a permanent end to hostilities, the release of all living hostages held in Gaza, and a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Given that there seems to be no framework for that permanent cessation, the prospect of success in so short a time is dubious.

Stage Three would then see the return of the remains of all dead hostages, and the start of a massive reconstruction effort in Gaza by the international community. 

What’s missing

The plan is clearly incomplete as presented, and it raises the question of whether there are more key details to be worked out or if these issues, some of which are very significant, weren’t included in the announcement for political reasons. 

Perhaps the biggest point that is absent from Biden’s presentation is governance. It is unfathomable that either Israel or the United States are prepared to tolerate a Hamas government. The Palestinian Authority might have an easier time taking over if Hamas accepts this offer and spins it as a victory for the Palestinian people. But would Israel really agree to that? Would the people of Gaza be willing to accept some sort of international coalition in temporary control of Gaza? That, too, seems unlikely, although it may be a price worth paying to end this torment. 

The questions of war crimes, the case before the ICJ, and potential arrest warrants from the ICC remain open. If the major violence in Gaza ends, it is quite possible that those cases could all disappear, and with them, the hope of accountability for powerful states and their leaders who commit war crimes. It is, again, hard to fathom Israel ending its slaughter only to face those charges, and hard to imagine the United States sitting idly by for that.

There’s also an obvious issue of enforcement. Biden stated that if Hamas violates the terms of this proposal after it is agreed to, Israel could then resume its genocidal campaign. That’s a threat Israel will always have at its disposal. 

But what if Israel fails to live up to its side of the deal? Biden seems to have simply assumed that Israel will abide by the deal if it agrees to it. The lessons of Oslo are completely lost on the President, and the reality that only external pressure—which must include the United States, though it need not be the only state applying that pressure—can ensure Israeli compliance is missing again. That is a story with a very bad ending that we have seen played out many times over the years.

The politics of the offer

The timing of this offer hints at why it came about today. With Donald Trump having been convicted on 34 felony counts in New York just the day before, Biden wants very much to capitalize on Trump’s bad day, especially because, at least initially, Trump’s conviction seems not to have given him much of a boost. 

Of course, given how his support of genocide in Gaza has cost Biden, any time is a good time to strike a deal. The real question is why Israel suddenly agreed to it. 

First, it’s important to understand Israel’s process here. Its negotiating team worked with Egypt, Qatar, and the US on this agreement, but it is unlikely that this is an offer Israel is making, as Biden characterized it. Netanyahu would have had to approve the U.S. making the offer in Israel’s name, but that doesn’t mean Israel has officially accepted the proposal. Netanyahu has the final word, but if the far-right parties threaten to quit the government, he may back off. 

Moreover, Netanyahu hasn’t needed much arm-twisting to reject ceasefires that would lead to the release of the hostages held in Gaza, as he has done so repeatedly almost from the start. Even if his government doesn’t immediately collapse, he is still at serious risk, given his ongoing corruption trials. Keeping the killing in Gaza going forestalls that case. 

The invitation from Congress is likely part of a package that Biden has offered Netanyahu to let this proposal go at least tentatively forward. There may be other incentives that have yet to materialize for Netanyahu to raise his profile in Israel or for other parties, such as Yair Lapid’s Yesh Atid, to agree to save his government if the far-right parties bolt. But Biden desperately needs to salvage something positive out of the debacle of Gaza, and if he sees a way to save Netanyahu in order to make that happen, he will certainly do it.

Biden opened the door for Netanyahu in his speech, saying that so many of Hamas’ fighters had been killed over the past eight months that they could not possibly mount a significant assault like the one on October 7 again. He was clearly building a road Netanyahu could take to claim victory by accepting this deal, by implying that Netanyahu’s condition of utterly defeating Hamas had been fulfilled as much as realistically possible. 

The responses

Yet both Netanyahu and Hamas were cagily positive in their responses. Hamas released a statement saying, “Hamas confirms its readiness to deal positively and in a constructive manner with any proposal that is based on the permanent ceasefire and the full withdrawal [of Israeli forces] from the Gaza Strip, the reconstruction [of Gaza], and the return of the displaced to their places, along with the fulfillment of a genuine prisoner swap deal if the occupation clearly announces commitment to such deal.”

It’s a smart response. It reflects that they are still parsing out the details, some of which have not yet been made public, and will not publicly commit to the deal until Israel affirms its support for it. The fact is, this proposal mostly satisfies the demands Hamas has repeated over the past months: complete ceasefire, end of hostilities, complete Israeli withdrawal, and complete Palestinian freedom to return to wherever they were chased from in Gaza. 

All of those things don’t necessarily happen on day one, but Hamas is unlikely to find a better deal than this one, and it is certainly one that allows them to claim, realistically, that they withstood everything Israel had to assault them with, and they and the people of Gaza remained standing. Israel will have its own narrative, and each side’s supporters will embrace the various versions, but this is a realistic case for Hamas to make. 

Biden alluded to the idea that this proposal somehow puts the idea of a two-state solution back on track, which is utter nonsense. It will have no effect on that illusion; it will simply end the slaughter. 

Biden also hinted that this could lead to the normalization agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel. This, too, is unlikely. It’s not impossible, but it will require a number of other things to fall into place, including Senate approval of that deal and Israel committing to a Palestinian state, something Netanyahu is highly unlikely to do. 

Indeed, if that deal is in any way a part of this one, it is a recipe for disaster. Not only because the normalization idea is terrible policy for the U.S., the Palestinians, and the entire region; but also because it threatens to spur the same desperation that was a significant factor in Hamas’ decision to launch the October 7 attack in the first place. 

Biden would be unwise to pursue that course, although he will be tempted, given his obsession with the idea of Saudi-Israel normalization and his yearning for a major win on foreign policy. This proposal, even if it is accepted, is unlikely to be that kind of win.

That’s so mostly because the entire proposal makes it clear that Israel and the United States lost. The truce that might take hold has been on the table since last year in one form or another. A lot of Palestinian lives, as well as some Israeli ones, could have been saved. 

Israel insisted that only force of arms could free the hostages, despite the fact that they had failed to do so, while an earlier ceasefire did include the freeing of nearly half the hostages taken. Hamas continues to exist, and it will do so whether this proposal is accepted or not. The people of Gaza have remained in Gaza, despite the massive loss of life. 

All Israel accomplished was slaughter and destruction, while severely and permanently damaging their standing in the world, not only with millions upon millions of people, but with many governments as well. 

All of this could have been avoided, and it doesn’t take complicated plans to do it. Simply allow Palestinians the rights and freedoms we all expect. In that world, there’s no need for October 7, no need for hate, fear, and insecurity. Biden’s speech, and this proposal, offers no hint that he understands that any better now than he did on October 6.