The unfolding events were a far cry from what Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had envisioned.
Just days earlier, Netanyahu believed he had secured a decisive victory with President Trump’s peace proposal. This plan presented an ultimatum to Hamas: release all Israeli hostages within 72 hours, disarm completely, and relinquish any future role in Gaza. Failure to comply would grant Israel unrestricted authority to dismantle the militant group.
However, by Friday, Hamas responded to a fresh ultimatum from Trump with a statement declaring their readiness to release all hostages. Crucially, their statement remained vague on a timeline for the release, avoided committing to disarming, and expressed a desire to ‘discuss the details’ of the American plan.
To Senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch ally of Netanyahu, Hamas’s response was, in essence, a clear rejection of the President’s initial proposal, a sentiment he shared publicly.
Michael Herzog, Netanyahu’s former ambassador to the United States, echoed this view, describing Hamas’s reply as ‘a ‘no’ cloaked as a ‘yes’.’
Despite these interpretations, Trump surprisingly embraced Hamas’s statement as an unequivocal ‘yes.’ He promptly declared, ‘Based on the Statement just issued by Hamas, I believe they are ready for a lasting PEACE. Israel must immediately stop the bombing of Gaza, so that we can get the Hostages out safely and quickly!’
Netanyahu’s office took several hours to respond, issuing a statement past 3 a.m. Israel time on Saturday. It affirmed Israel’s readiness for the ‘immediate release of all hostages’ but conspicuously omitted any mention of Hamas’s counter-conditions. Instead, it reiterated Israel’s commitment to cooperate with the White House to ‘end the war in accordance with the principles set forth by Israel that are consistent with President Trump’s vision.’
Regardless of the diplomatic nuances, the sudden prospect of the hostages’ return and a potential end to the prolonged conflict sparked widespread hope in both Israel and Gaza, following nearly two years of intense warfare and destruction.
Netanyahu now finds himself navigating a complex maze of domestic political anxieties and intense international pressure. Not only from Trump, but also from numerous Muslim and Arab nations across the Middle East, and indeed, from countries worldwide that hailed Friday’s announcements as if a genuine peace had already been secured.
As former Israeli national security adviser Eran Etzion observed, ‘He will find himself with the entire world clapping, and he needs to explain why he’s against it.’
Etzion pointed out that Trump’s demand for an immediate Israeli military stand-down, followed by direct negotiations with Hamas, was likely unwelcome news for Netanyahu. ‘These negotiations will be conducted under the conditions of a cease-fire, which is contrary to Netanyahu’s design,’ Etzion explained. ‘Netanyahu wanted this all to take place under Israeli military pressure.’
This dramatic shift on Friday night also posed a significant threat to Netanyahu’s governing coalition. His right-wing allies had previously been told, via Trump’s initial Monday proposal, that their aspirations of permanently relocating Palestinians from Gaza, and enabling Israeli settlement and annexation of the enclave, would need to be set aside. Now, they were implicitly being told that Hamas might remain a fixture, possibly even refusing to disarm.
Shira Efron, an Israeli policy analyst at RAND Corporation, questioned the sustainability of Netanyahu’s government, stating, ‘I don’t see how his coalition partners can live with that.’
Efron suggested that Netanyahu could spin the development as an achievement, emphasizing that the Trump plan would halt the war, secure the hostages’ release, establish a new governance structure for Gaza, and enlist Arab and Muslim nations in its stabilization and reconstruction.
However, she concluded that ‘his partners were hoping for a different story — an unrealistic story.’