My initial thoughts on the deal. There’s no phase two. That's clear to everyone, right? Phase two might happen someday, but it’s unrelated to what’s just been signed. The deal signed now is a hostage release deal. It doesn’t imply anything about the future. Theoretically, fantasies could come true: Emiratis and allies dismantling tunnels, an international body formed, Tony Blair governing Gaza. All this could happen in theory, but it’s not part of the current tactical negotiations. What we have now is a hostage deal, and a ceasefire while talks continue in good faith. There’s the question of course: who decides if talks are happening in good faith? Under Trump, Israel has previously said “Talks aren’t genuine or productive,” and resumed fighting. But this time, I don’t think we’ll see IDF tanks rushing back into Gaza, like what happened when the last two ceasefires ended. The big question is: Are we moving towards the Lebanese model Israel mentioned? In other words, the IDF stays beyond the international border and strikes targets from the air when it detects buildups or threats. Attempts to harm Israel are obvious. But what we’re talking about is buildup efforts, like digging more tunnels or building more arms-producing lathes. This is what Israel is aiming for. The reasonable assumption in Jerusalem is that President Trump will approve it. That’s one point. The IDF will withdraw to the 53% line. It was 57% initially, then dropped to 53% when the hostages will be freed. The talks afterwards are based on the principle of Israeli withdrawal in return for demilitarization and dismantling. Of course, we all assume that Hamas won’t disarm willingly, and the Emiratis and other international forces won’t achieve this quickly either. Now, regarding the hostage issue. I’ll admit than when I hear people say that Israel is “making peace with enemies,” I smell Oslo in the air, and the implications it carries. This isn’t peace, and these are bitter enemies, still on their knees.
The map presented by Finance Minister Smotrich proposes Israel annexing 82% of Judea and Samaria — and has the Ministry of Defense’s logo on it. image
The prospect of opening an embassy in Ramallah is, of course, all very exciting for Paris. So as a local, let me suggest some potential locations for France’s embassy in Ramallah. If Macron wants his ambassador to be near the Palestinian Authority headquarters, he can put Paris’ embassy on Yahya Ayyash street. Also known as “The Engineer,” Ayyash was the brain behind Hamas’ wave of suicide bombings in the 1990s. By the time Israel eliminated him in 1996, his work had left some 100 Israeli civilians dead and 400 wounded. Not what France is looking for? Sure. If Macron doesn’t want to be in the heart of the Palestinian capital, he could put the embassy in Al-Bireh, a one mile walk from the Ramallah grave of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. Al-Bireh also has its own landmarks, such as Dalal Mughrabi Square. Born in Lebanon, Mughrabi rose to fame in 1978 after hijacking an Israeli civilian bus and carrying out a massacre that left 38 Israelis dead, including 13 children. Known as the Coastal Road Massacre, it was the deadliest terror attack in Israel’s history until October 7. But perhaps the French President doesn’t want his embassy next to a square named after a terrorist. That’s quite understandable. Maybe placing it next to a school is more appropriate? In that case, Paris’ ambassador can set up shop next to Amin al-Husseini Elementary School in Al-Bireh, named after Haj Amin al-Husseini. Jerusalem’s Grand Mufti during the British Mandate, al-Husseini moved to Berlin in November 1941, and met with Adolf Hitler three weeks later. As part of his alliance with the Nazis, al-Husseini, amongst other things, recruited Muslim men to fight in the German Waffen-SS. Truth be told, wherever France decides to plant its flag, it won’t be far from a shrine to someone who thought Jewish blood was cheap. The only question is whether Macron cares to notice. View quoted note →
🚨France is considering opening an embassy in Ramallah following its recognition of a Palestinian state next month, according to Emmanuel Macron’s Middle East advisor Ofer Bronchtein, who spoke to [@almagor_tomer]( ). Bronchtein told Almagor that a stable Palestinian state is in Israel’s interest, and that the October 7 massacre “would not have happened if there had been a Palestinian state.” He also said: “We are trying to prevent Israel from entering Gaza City and escalating the situation” and that Israel will encounter “very strong resistance” from the international community, though Paris hopes “to avoid the imposition of sanctions.”