US-backed ceasefire plan for Gaza under discussion, but optimism fading
US, Qatari and Egyptian mediators have been working to secure an agreement. However, initial optimism that a deal might be at hand has waned in recent days.
Here are the details of the ceasefire proposals, as outlined by an official who spoke on condition of anonymity, and a look at some political calculations in play:
HOSTAGES AND PALESTINIAN PRISONERS
A total of 10 hostages held in Gaza will be returned together with the bodies of 18 others, spread out over 60 days. The swaps will take place without ceremonies or parades. In exchange, Israel will release detained Palestinians. The exact number is not clear.
Israel said of 50 hostages held by Hamas and its allies, about 20 are believed to be alive.
AID TO PALESTINIANS
In accordance with a January 19 agreement, aid will immediately enter Gaza in sufficient amounts with the involvement of the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross.
ISRAELI WITHDRAWALS
On day one, after an initial eight hostages are released, the Israeli army will withdraw from parts of northern Gaza as per maps that will be agreed.
On day seven, after receiving five bodies, Israel will withdraw from parts of the south as per the maps.
A technical team will work on drawing boundaries for withdrawals during rapid negotiations that will take place after agreement on the framework of the proposal.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
4 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Trump says Hamas 'didn't want' Gaza deal as talks break down
JERUSALEM - US President Donald Trump accused Hamas on Friday of not wanting to reach a ceasefire deal in Gaza as Israel said it would explore "alternative options" to rescue hostages after negotiations collapsed. An Israeli official meanwhile told AFP air drops of aid would resume soon over the Gaza Strip, where aid groups warned of surging numbers of malnourished children as international concern mounted over the deepening humanitarian crisis after more than 21 months of war. After US and Israeli negotiators quit indirect talks with Hamas in Qatar, Trump said that "it was was too bad. Hamas didn't really want to make a deal. I think they want to die." The US president argued that the Palestinian militant group, whose 7 October 2023 attack on Israel triggered the war, was not ready to hand over the remaining captives held in Gaza because "they know what happens after you get the final hostages". His special envoy Steve Witkoff accused Hamas of not "acting in good faith" in the negotiations that ended on Thursday. Senior Hamas official Bassem Naim in turn accused Witkoff of distorting the reality of the talks and walking back on agreements that had been reached between the parties. Witkoff was looking to "serve the Israeli position", Naim told AFP. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that "together with our US allies, we are now considering alternative options to bring our hostages home, end Hamas's terror rule, and secure lasting peace." Witkoff similarly said Washington would "consider alternative options" on Gaza, without elaborating on what they could entail. Netanyahu's far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir called to reinstate a complete aid blockade, occupy the entirety of Gaza, "encourage" its people to leave and re-establish Israeli settlements there. Mediators Qatar and Egypt said in a joint statement that the talks could still resume, describing their suspension as "normal in the context of these complex negotiations" and vowing to carry on with "intensive efforts" to secure an elusive breakthrough. 'CARNAGE AND FAMINE' More than 100 aid and human rights groups warned this week that "mass starvation" was spreading in Gaza. Doctors Without Borders (MSF) said that a quarter of the young children and pregnant or breastfeeding mothers it had screened at its clinics last week were malnourished, a day after the United Nations said one in five children in Gaza City were suffering from malnutrition. The leaders of Britain, France and Germany, in a joint statement Friday, said the "humanitarian catastrophe" in Gaza "must end now". "We call on the Israeli government to immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid" and facilitate the "urgent" work of UN agencies and humanitarian groups, the European leaders said. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres on Friday slammed the international community for turning a blind eye to the suffering of starving Palestinians, calling it a "moral crisis that challenges the global conscience". Guterres said while he had repeatedly condemned Hamas's 2023 attack on Israel, "nothing can justify the explosion of death and destruction since." Israel has rejected accusations it is responsible for the deepening crisis in Gaza, which the World Health Organization has called "man-made". An Israeli official said Friday that air drops of aid would resume "in the upcoming days" and "will be managed by the UAE and Jordan". Humanitarian organisations have repeatedly said that parachuting aid parcels, which began in early 2024, was ineffective and cannot replace land access. Numerous Palestinians had been killed by falling crates, in stampedes or drowned trying to retrieve packages from the sea, before the operations ended after several months. 'IT'S A TRAP' Israel placed the Gaza Strip under an aid blockade in March, which it only partially eased two months later while sidelining the longstanding UN-led distribution system. Aid groups have refused to work with the Israeli- and US-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, accusing it of aiding Israeli military goals. The GHF system, in which Gazans have to join huge queues to reach one of just four sites, has often proved deadly, with the UN saying that more than 750 Palestinian aid-seekers have been killed by Israeli forces near GHF centres since late May. In Khan Yunis, in Gaza's south, Fatima al-Shawaf mourned a relative she said was killed while seeking aid. "I would rather we die of hunger than have anyone go to this trap that is killing our youth. It is a trap," she told AFP. The World Food Programme said almost a third of people in Gaza are "not eating for days", with tens of thousands "in urgent need of treatment". Israel's military campaign in Gaza has killed 59,676 Palestinians, mostly civilians, according to the health ministry in the Hamas-run territory. Hamas's October 2023 attack resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, most of them civilians, according to an AFP tally based on official figures. Of the 251 hostages taken during the attack, 49 are still being held in Gaza, including 27 the Israeli military says are dead.
IOL News
5 hours ago
- IOL News
Western media finally confronts Israel's actions in Gaza
An F-35 fighter jet flies during a graduation ceremony for Israeli Air Force pilots at Hatzerim Airbase, in southern Israel. In a relentless wave of reprisals, the Israeli Defence Force has killed, maimed and arbitrarily detained largely powerless Palestinians, many without charge. Image: Amir Cohen / Reuters THE silence, nay, collaboration of the Western mainstream media with Israel's genocidal military onslaught against Gaza and the Palestinian people in general has been mind-boggling. Since October 2023, when Hamas launched a surprise violent attack in Southern Israel that resulted in some 1 200 people killed, life for Palestinian men, women and children has been akin to hell on earth. Israel's fury, vengeance and retribution against the people of Gaza have been brutal, ferocious and limitless. In a relentless wave of reprisals, the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) has killed, maimed and arbitrarily detained largely powerless Palestinians, many without charge. The IDF's reign of terror in every corner of Palestine has known no bounds. Since October 2023, Israelis have killed no less than 60 000 Palestinians amid a systematic annihilation of the Gaza population, and displaced nearly 2 million, according to the UN. Thousands remain trapped under the ruins of what was once a normal Gaza Strip, despite occupation by apartheid Israel. What triggered me to pen this piece this week has been the rare public criticism of Israel by four leading Western media outlets that echoed the views of the UN and more than 100 aid organisations that have accused Israel of starving Palestinians. Although this deliberate mass starvation and killing of dozens queueing for food is ubiquitous, Israel has thus far enjoyed biased support by the West. The British public broadcaster BBC, Associated Press (AP), Reuters and Agence-France Presse (AFP) this week issued a statement they wrote collectively in which they decry Israel's deliberate use of starvation as a weapon of war. The media outlets above revealed that their own employees inside Gaza were starving and unable to fend for their families. 'We are desperately concerned for our journalists in Gaza, who are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families,' the rare joint statement read, before continuing: 'It is essential that adequate food supplies reach the people there.' This departure from the norm is significant for many reasons. Finally, it removes the veil of Israel's protection from critical public scrutiny that has unwittingly aided the extinction of the people of Gaza. Together with CNN, among other impactful Western media outlets, the West has remained largely blind and speechless to Israeli excesses in its merciless military operation against the Palestinians. It is in this context, therefore, that the public denouncement of Israel by Western media carries massive weight. Inevitably, breaking the silence by the Western media and abandoning their apparently collective complicity in what South Africa and others have described before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as sheer unadulterated genocide changes the game altogether. Not only does it cause Israel to adjust its dubious public relations drive, but it also punches holes for the Western publics and their governments to reconsider the free pass that Israel has thus far enjoyed. In the last 21 months, some 200 Palestinian journalists have been killed by Israeli fire, without any iota of consequences. Of greater concern, in my book, has been the glaring absence of international outcry by the self-righteous Western media outlets in particular. The silence of Western governments has been utterly deafening, too. The Qatari news network, Al Jazeera, has lost some of its journalists to Israel's deliberate targeting of their staff due to their tough reporting approach that exposes the truth, as seen on social media worldwide. In fact, Al Jazeera is banned in Israel and the West Bank. Israel accuses their journalists as well as foreign correspondents as 'terror operatives' without evidence. Disturbingly, the Western media has turned a blind eye to the suppression of media freedom by Israel. Actually, the four media outlets that jointly issued a statement critical of Israel have themselves been previously criticised for their sheepish approach to news reporting. They have been accused of accepting the narrative of Israel about the war without any question — apparently too content to publicise the statements of the Israeli military officers as gospel truth. Last November, some 100 journalists from the BBC accused the corporation of Israeli bias and of lacking 'consistently fair and accurate evidence-based journalism'. The BBC denied the claims, just as AFP, Reuters, CNN, AP and others contemptuously reject any criticism levelled at them. Israel's genocide in Gaza has triggered the reconfiguration of global relations beyond measure. It has exposed the weakness and bias of Western-led global governance systems such as the International Criminal Court (ICC), the shortcomings of the ICJ's lack of enforceable rulings and the ugly spectre of unilateralism in international relations. Additionally, the persistent failure of the UN Security Council (UNSC) to obligate the cessation of hostilities in Gaza has further exposed the hidden rot that plagues global bodies. The veto power possessed by the five permanent members of the UNSC has also proved to be archaic and susceptible to abuse, particularly by the US in defence of attempts to rein in Israel. The US is one of the five permanent members of the UNSC. Others are the UK, France, China and Russia. The Majority World has been campaigning for urgent reforms of the UNSC, so that all nations can exercise equal authority reflective of the 21st-century architecture of the international world order. At the UN General Assembly, any condemnation of Israel remains largely muted and unenforceable anyway. The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) is all but a talk shop that is past its sell-by date. The UN Charter, which is supposed to be based on the principle of 'dialogue among equals', has become a doormat where heads of state wipe their feet on entrance. The plain disability to stop Israel's genocide against Gazans and the blatant fear by the large majority of the nations of the world to emulate South Africa and call it for what it is — genocide — is an indictment of our global governance system. Israel's impunity reminds the international community that Western hegemony still reigns supreme. Its various poles of power can be seen through the activities of the EU, Nato and the G7, among others. The concerns and voices of the Global South seldom make any impact. By and large, the persistent legacy of colonialism that thrives on the notion of divide and rule still keeps like-minded weaker economies apart and unable to cooperate. It is a separate development. In its defence, its architects describe it as 'separate but equal'. The role of the media in society is to hold authorities accountable. Anarchy thrives when the media shirks its fundamental responsibilities. Additionally, appropriate media is the one that consciously stands with the weak against the powerful. Pardon the cliché, but the media that is morally upright is the one that plays the role of being the 'voice of the voiceless'. Amid the ongoing Israeli genocide, it is refreshing to note the adoption of a more responsible posture by the leading Western media networks. This is highly commendable. As they say, better late than never. Their public rebuke of Israel will certainly not go unnoticed. It would most probably be safe, whatever is left of those that are still lucky to be alive in Gaza. A media that is embedded is a media that has outsourced its responsibility and function to its handlers, be they the IDF, politicians or big business interests. Journalism that fails to question authority is a dismal failure. It is nothing short of sunshine journalism whose modus operandi is to sing for its supper to the detriment of the public they are supposed to serve. It is tempting to lambaste the Western media outlets as a collective, but that would be tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bath water. The four media houses outlined above will go down in history as having broken ranks by speaking out against Israel's monumental war crimes, albeit belatedly. * Abbey Makoe is the publisher and editor-in-chief of the Global South Media Network ( The views expressed are personal. ** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, IOL, or Independent Media. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
Understanding the cost implications of the US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act on the property sector
If foreign investors exit the South African property market, property prices may cool. Image: Leon Lestrade, Independent Newspapers. The US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025 will negatively affect the local property sector's investment dynamics and have cost implications if it becomes law. The bill was introduced by Ronny Jackson, a congressman from Texas, in April. For it to become a law, it will need to be approved by the House and Senate before being signed by President Donald Trump. It accuses South Africa of undermining the United States' interests by maintaining close relationships with the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation, nations that are Pretoria's strong allies and key trading partners. On investment dynamics, Dr Farai Nyika, an academic programme leader in the School of Public Administration at the Management College of Southern Africa(MANCOSA), says South Africa's property sector depends significantly on both domestic and international investment. He said foreign involvement includes not only direct investment in physical developments but also the purchase of South African property-related shares on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE). 'Should the bill become US law, the geopolitical risks associated with doing business in South Africa may deter foreign investors. This could result in a slowdown in physical property developments by foreign investors and a sell-off of South African property stocks. "Such a sell-off would constrain these companies' ability to raise capital, potentially leading to reduced profitability, operational cutbacks, and, disastrously, job losses,' Nyika told "Independent Media Property". The academic leader said it is key to note that the bill, in its current form, may change to broaden penalties beyond what is currently stated, so they could only speculate on its current form. He said it should be remembered that the bill is really targeting South African individuals, rather than the country as a whole. 'However, perceptions matter more than reality and legal precision; for example, though Zimbabwean politicians were the target of U.S sanctions in 2003, the Zim government claimed that the country's subsequent economic hardships were the result of the entire country being sanctioned. "By extension-sanctions that target individuals indirectly harm the economy. Because many property investors will say that they do not want to do business in a country that the 'US is sanctioning'. "Perversely, there could be some economic benefits to the local property market from the U.S sanctioning local politicians. If foreign investors exit the market, property prices may cool. "This could make housing more affordable for locals who have previously been priced out-particularly in urban centres like Cape Town, where gentrification has greatly limited social mobility and access to property ownership,' Nyika said. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading With regards to cost implications, he said a large proportion of building materials, especially high-end fixtures for luxury properties and solar technologies, are imported. He said in a country that has been grappling with persistent load shedding and a transition to cleaner energy, the demand for solar and energy-efficient solutions is rising. 'However, if the bill disrupts trade relations or leads to broader sanctions, the cost of these imported materials may increase, raising construction and development costs. This could slow down South Africa's Just Energy Transition in the short term.' With that said, Nyika said economic pressure often fosters innovation. He said historical precedents show that sanctions or trade restrictions can trigger industrial growth-as was the case in both Zimbabwe and apartheid-era South Africa during the 1960s and 70s. 'In the long run, if the South African government were to prioritise industrial policy and local manufacturing, the country could reduce reliance on imports. "This would benefit the property sector by fostering domestic production of certain formerly imported building materials and solar items, improving resilience, and potentially creating new economic opportunities to expand local property.' Asked whether the South Africa property sector will have resort in this regard, Dr Thandile Ncwana, also an Academic Programme Leader at the same institution, said but some of the possible strategic play for South Africa in this situation should the bill be approved, is to mitigate escalation and maintain its relationship with the US by considering engaging in high-level bilateral diplomacy aimed at clarifying its foreign policy positions while reaffirming its commitment to democratic values, trade and multilateral cooperation. She said proactive parliamentary diplomacy, Track II dialogue forums, and regular engagement with the US Congress and civil society actors could help reframe South Africa's stance as one of principled non-alignment rather than strategic antagonism. 'Because reinforcing bilateral economic ties and highlighting areas of mutual benefit, such as climate action, infrastructure development and health, can serve as diplomatic buffers. The government also have a chance to carefully balance between asserting its foreign policy independence and avoiding diplomatic or economic isolation. "This can be achieved by adopting a transparent foreign policy communication strategy, clearly articulating the principles behind its international engagements, and avoiding actions that may be interpreted as tacit support for states or groups under U.S. sanctions,' Ncwana said. She added that multilateralism should remain at the heart of South Africa's diplomacy, and efforts must be intensified to build consensus with African partners, BRICS allies, and Western institutions alike to maintain strategic flexibility and avoid becoming a casualty of great-power rivalry. Politically, she said South Africa should adopt a dual-track diplomacy strategy that preserves its non-aligned international stance while actively engaging U.S. policymakers to dispel misconceptions about its foreign policy positions. 'This includes convening high-level bilateral dialogues, leveraging multilateral platforms like the United Nations and African Union to clarify its principled positions, and re-establishing structured parliamentary exchanges with the US Congress. "South Africa's leadership can also benefit from a strategic public diplomacy campaign that communicates its commitment to constitutional democracy, human rights, and peaceful conflict resolution principles historically shared with the US. "These efforts can de-escalate tensions and rebuild political trust, allowing space for honest disagreement without undermining the broader relationship.' Ncwana said that overall, the South African government can lastly play a strategic move by enhancing interdepartmental coordination, particularly between the Departments of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), Trade and Industry, and National Treasury to ensure cohesive messaging and responsiveness to external developments like the US legislative process. Independent Media Property
