As expected, Hamas rejected Israel's proposals, described as the "Witkoff initiative" (though it's not actually his initiative), but did not withdraw from negotiations. Their aim is to reach a comprehensive agreement that would include the release of all hostages, Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, reopening of the Rafah crossing for Gaza's reconstruction (beginning with hospital rehabilitation), relocating Gazans to permanent housing, and bringing in heavy equipment to clear debris.

In a statement attributed to Khalil Hayya, Hamas stated it would no longer agree to partial deals after realizing Netanyahu uses them not as a path to end the war, but as a means to restart fighting each time to appease Smotrich and Ben-Gvir.

Surprisingly, or perhaps not, Trump's envoy for hostage affairs, Adam Bohler, returned to the scene and in an interview with Al Jazeera spoke in similar terms, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive deal and for Hamas to disarm.

Notably, points agreed upon between Hayya and Bohler included allowing an inter-Arab/international force to enter Gaza to disarm Hamas as part of the "day after" plan. Hamas spokespersons denied this, but Hayya himself has not retracted it. Moreover, Egypt, after initially expressing reservations, has recently joined the demand for Hamas to disarm.

From Israel's perspective, the problem is that Egypt ties its involvement in Gaza to connecting Gaza with the West Bank, to distance itself from any future association with Gaza. Israel dislikes this arrangement, as does Abbas, who doesn't want to introduce "political Hamas" into his domain.

Regarding Gaza, Israel considers a complete withdrawal out of the question, as Israel must maintain the buffer zone to protect its communities from Hamas's deadly terrorism.

Unless President Trump dictates a solution to this impasse before his trip to Saudi Arabia, the deal remains constrained by conflicting interests—and you can count on Netanyahu to exploit any crack to widen it as much as possible.

Last weekend, we witnessed a turning point in the position of hostage families from the "Forum of Hope," who shifted from supporting Netanyahu's stance to expressing disappointment with the government's positions. Between the lines, one could discern their disappointment over what appeared to be the government's promise that, in exchange for supporting Netanyahu, their sons would receive priority in release rounds. We hope we misunderstood, but this aligns with Netanyahu's pattern of dividing and fragmenting even families in mourning and pain.

Unfortunately, as we see it today, we must consider that Netanyahu's delay tactics may ultimately succeed, prolonging the hostages' suffering.

Therefore, perhaps the direct channel between Boehler and Hayya should be used to advance the humanitarian aspect of the hostages' situation—finding ways to care for them in captivity, ensuring they receive proper treatment, and at least allowing their families relief from anxiety about their fate. (All reports suggesting Trump dismissed Boehler have now been revealed as yet another Israeli spin.)

It seems to us that Khalil Hayya would now be interested in proving to Bohler that he is the address for Gaza's future, and will assist in this matter.

But of course, nothing will replace the swift release of all hostages.