A dramatic and significant breakthrough in the ongoing hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas has emerged from an intense meeting held over the weekend. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Steve Witkoff, the incoming Middle East envoy for President-elect Donald Trump, sat down for a tense discussion that ultimately shifted the trajectory of the talks in a way that had not been achieved all year by outgoing President Joe Biden’s administration. According to two high-ranking Arab officials speaking to The Times of Israel on Tuesday, Witkoff, in just one meeting, did more to persuade Netanyahu than Biden had managed throughout 2024.
Witkoff, who had been in Doha for several days working on the complex negotiations surrounding the release of hostages, made a crucial trip to Israel. This meeting, held at Netanyahu’s office in Jerusalem on Saturday, was pivotal in nudging the Israeli prime minister toward agreeing to several compromises that had been seen as essential for moving forward with a deal. The high-stakes meeting was a critical part of the broader efforts to broker an agreement before Trump’s inauguration on January 20.
The urgency was palpable, and the talks had been at an impasse for months, largely due to the challenges of reconciling the interests of both Israel and Hamas, as well as international mediators. The timing of Witkoff’s intervention seemed key, with one of the Arab officials stating that the breakthrough made by the US envoy could set the stage for a resolution. Despite the growing pressure to finalize the terms of the deal, the exact nature of the compromises remained sensitive, and neither Witkoff nor Netanyahu’s office provided direct comment on the specifics of the meeting.
However, the results were evident by Monday night. Israeli and Hamas negotiators, after their intense deliberations, signaled their acceptance of a proposed hostage deal in principle, according to the Arab officials. This development represented a critical shift in the discussions, marking a major step forward after months of stalled negotiations. Both parties have now turned their focus to the finalization of the implementation details, a process still marked by tensions over certain elements of the agreement.
One of the most contentious and unresolved aspects of the deal involves the parameters of Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. Mediators are still waiting for a map from the Israeli government that will lay out the specifics of this withdrawal, a key point of contention as both sides try to navigate the complexities of the deal. The Arab officials involved in the talks expressed their belief that an official announcement could come as early as Wednesday or Thursday, with a joint statement from the US, Qatar, and Egypt expected to formalize the terms of the deal.
In a separate development, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken weighed in on Tuesday, publicly stating that Israel had agreed to the hostage deal that would free the remaining 98 hostages. However, he pointed out that Hamas had not yet fully committed to the same terms. This gap in agreement underlines the ongoing challenges of reaching a comprehensive and lasting resolution to the conflict.
A closer look at the structure of the three-phase hostage deal reveals its complexity and the high stakes involved. While much of the framework mirrors a proposal put forward by Israel last May, it has taken months of negotiation and setbacks to bring both sides back to the table. The deal’s first phase would see 33 hostages—primarily women, children, elderly individuals, and those severely ill—released in exchange for approximately 1,000 Palestinian security prisoners. This phase also includes a partial withdrawal of Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) from Gaza and the facilitation of daily shipments of 600 trucks worth of humanitarian aid into the strip.
The second phase, to be negotiated once the first phase is underway, focuses on the release of the remaining living hostages and includes a formal declaration to end hostilities permanently. The third and final phase will address the return of the bodies still held by Hamas, ensuring that the last remaining issue tied to the hostage situation is resolved.
Significantly, the negotiations have been structured to be rolled out in stages, and talks for the second phase will not begin until the first stage has been completed. This phased approach represents a shift from previous negotiations, where talks often fell apart due to disagreements over the scope and sequence of the terms.
The Biden administration had been pressing Israel for some time to prepare for the post-conflict management of Gaza, particularly concerning the governance of the region after Hamas. However, Netanyahu resisted such planning, arguing that it would be futile to consider alternatives while Hamas was still in control. The US had hoped to see the Palestinian Authority, based in the West Bank, replace Hamas as the governing force in Gaza, but Netanyahu had concerns about this idea, seeing it as an unrealistic proposition.
Blinken’s remarks on Tuesday underscored the US administration’s frustrations with Israel’s stance. He unveiled a blueprint for the “day after” in Gaza, hoping that both parties would adopt it to ensure that the region does not fall back into the hands of extremists following any resolution of the current crisis. However, the diplomatic push to prepare for Gaza’s future governance had been stymied at various points, as Netanyahu’s government was reluctant to make concessions on this issue.
Despite these challenges, Blinken and other US officials have been able to achieve some degree of success in influencing Israel’s military strategy. For example, Israel had initially resisted allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza after the siege was imposed in the wake of the October 7 Hamas attack. However, the US, led by Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, managed to secure Israel’s agreement to facilitate aid deliveries, although the flow of assistance has remained inconsistent.
The pressure from the US on Israel to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza was made even more urgent after the Biden administration sent a letter in October warning that failure to meet certain conditions could jeopardize the continued supply of offensive weapons to Israel. Despite some pushback from Netanyahu’s government, the US ultimately declared itself satisfied with the progress made on humanitarian aid and other requests.
In addition to these efforts, Biden had to navigate the complexities of domestic politics in the US, especially as the election season unfolded. A third Arab official involved in the mediation process noted that Biden’s team was cautious in its public stance on Israel, as concerns over domestic political repercussions played a significant role in shaping US actions. For instance, the public statement made by Blinken in August, which claimed that Netanyahu had accepted a bridging proposal for a hostage deal, was later disputed by the negotiating parties and caused a setback in the talks.
As the negotiations continue, one thing is clear: both Israel and Hamas are committed to a phased approach, a strategy that appears to be gaining traction despite earlier setbacks. The coming days are critical, as the world watches to see whether a full, lasting agreement can be reached, bringing some degree of closure to a conflict that has been devastating for all parties involved. The role of international mediators, particularly the US, Qatar, and Egypt, will remain crucial as they work toward ensuring that the deal not only frees the hostages but also leads to a broader and more sustainable peace agreement.
Login