After successfully mediating a ceasefire in Lebanon, President Biden expressed optimism that this could lead to a breakthrough in Gaza. However, experts are skeptical of this possibility, citing significant differences between the situations in Lebanon and Gaza. In Lebanon, Hezbollah’s weakened position allowed for compromise, while in Gaza, Hamas still holds leverage with the presence of hostages.
The truce in Lebanon was facilitated by Hezbollah’s diminished power due to assassinations and losses on the battlefield. This made it easier for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to engage in negotiations without risking his political standing. On the other hand, in Gaza, Hamas’s possession of hostages gives them a strong bargaining chip, making it challenging to reach a resolution.
Furthermore, Netanyahu faces internal pressure from his far-right coalition allies who are adamant about defeating Hamas completely and settling Gaza with Jewish civilians. The fear of losing coalition support and facing early elections prevents Netanyahu from making concessions to Hamas. In contrast, the situation in Lebanon allowed for more flexibility on Netanyahu’s part, as there was less urgency to deliver a decisive blow to Hezbollah.
According to analyst Aaron David Miller, the dynamics of the Lebanon deal were different from those in Gaza, highlighting the complexities of the situation. While the ceasefire in Lebanon was a manageable issue for Netanyahu’s coalition, the Gaza conflict poses greater challenges and risks for the Israeli Prime Minister.
In light of these factors, achieving a breakthrough in Gaza remains a daunting task, with various political, strategic, and humanitarian considerations at play. The road to peace in Gaza is fraught with obstacles that must be carefully navigated to ensure a lasting and meaningful resolution for all parties involved.
