Hamas Suggests Releasing 10 Living Hostages, 18 Bodies
Hamas said in a statement that under the deal, it will release ten living Israeli hostages and 18 bodies in return for Israel's release of a number of Palestinian prisoners.
The Hamas statement added: "This proposal aims to achieve a permanent ceasefire, a comprehensive withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, and ensure the flow of aid to our people and our families in the Gaza Strip."
Hamas sources told Asharq Al-Awsat earlier Saturday that the movement had submitted its response to the mediators in the morning regarding the proposal on a ceasefire lasting 60 days.
According to Hamas sources, the movement engaged in extensive discussions and held meetings with leaders from various Palestinian factions in Qatar and other capitals, including Beirut, in an effort to form a unified Palestinian stance.
The Hamas leadership and the factions viewed the response as largely positive, although it included some conditions necessary to ensure a successful implementation, the sources said.
All requests for amendments on the proposal were made through factional consensus, and it is expected that they will be accepted if there is genuine US pressure on Israel, they added.
One key remark aims to prevent the release of Israeli captives only on two specific days in the first week, as outlined in Witkoff's proposal. Instead, the release will occur in stages, similar to the previous deal, to ensure the agreement is fully implemented over the course of two months, which is the proposed 60-day period.
Other Hamas sources stated that the response was neither strictly positive nor negative but included precise comments to ensure that any final agreement meets the bare minimum of Palestinian demands.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
10 minutes ago
- Arab News
Lebanese state and Hezbollah face their most difficult hour
Can Lebanon become a normal state again, one that makes decisions through state institutions and that respects its commitments in line with international laws? Can Hezbollah acknowledge that the 'Axis of Resistance' is no more, and that it has no choice but to return to Lebanon and close the chapter of the 'regional player?' Can the party agree to a lesser role for Lebanon if Iran agrees to a lesser role in the region in recognition of the new balance of power? It does not take a genius to recognize that the situation in Lebanon has not changed, even though the features of this new reality have yet to be fully formed. Joseph Aoun was sworn in as president with Arab and international backing and under the slogan of reclaiming the state with all of its institutions. Nawaf Salam was named prime minister with the same goals. However, it was evident that Lebanon would not enjoy regional and international support for its reconstruction unless the decisions that are carried out in the south are restored to the state alone. I recalled what an Arab politician once told me. He said the Axis of Resistance was based on three pillars: The first was Gen. Qassem Soleimani, with his unique position in the Iranian supreme leader's circle and role in exporting the revolution that is enshrined in the Iranian constitution. The second was Hassan Nasrallah, who was Soleimani's partner in building the axis in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon. The third was Syria, which acted as the supply route for arms, 'advisers,' and funds from Tehran to Beirut passing through Iraq. What is left of Hezbollah's regional role now that Soleimani and Nasrallah are dead, and the Syrian 'bridge' has been severed with the ousting of former leader Bashar Assad? The politician said Hezbollah is undoubtedly going through the most difficult phase since its establishment in the wake of the Israeli invasion of Beirut in 1982. Nasrallah and Soleimani are no more, and the Syrian Arab Republic President Ahmed Al-Sharaa has not forgotten what the pair did to keep Assad's regime alive. Tehran has suffered from Israeli jets breaching its skies. There is no doubt that Hezbollah fought fiercely, but there can be no denying Israel's superiority and how it succeeded in eliminating the pillars of the axis. This reality prompted Aoun to dare to declare the facts as they are after he realized that Lebanon was at risk of more Israeli violations and that it would not get out from under the rubble without paying a price — Hezbollah and its weapons. So, he openly declared what his predecessors had avoided saying explicitly: The possession of weapons should be restricted to the army and Hezbollah must disarm. Hezbollah is obviously having a hard time accepting this demand, which is effectively calling on it to abandon its regional exploits and become a local party that does not monopolize the decision of war and peace and has no military arsenal. In other words, it no longer has the right to name presidents and veto any Lebanese decisions that do not align with its regional vision. In early summer 2004, I held a meeting with Assad, with discussions focusing on the US invasion of Iraq and its impact on the region. I had to ask about Lebanon, where Syrian troops were deployed throughout its territories and where Syria held sway over its decisions. The country was then ruled by President Emile Lahoud. Assad said that his term would end in the fall. I asked him about the rumors that the term would be extended, to which he replied: 'Wasn't the extension of Elias Hrawi's term costly?' I agreed, and Assad added: 'Don't you think Lahoud's extension will be even more costly?' And I had to agree. Assad revealed that he had a list of possible presidential candidates, including Jean Obeid, whom he said was skilled at politics, but would be no match for Rafik Hariri. Asked who his preferred candidate was, he tried to imply that the Lebanese themselves would decide in the end. I told him that I was not some ignorant stranger and that I knew how things worked in Lebanon. At my insistence, Assad told me he favored Suleiman Frangieh, whom he praised. Will Hezbollah assume the responsibility for the isolation that will befall Lebanon if it insists on hanging on to its arsenal? Ghassan Charbel In the end, Lahoud's term was extended and Frangieh was ruled out as a candidate, perhaps because he was a family friend of the Assads. I returned to Syria that fall and asked Assad what prompted the extension, to which he replied that a 'friend' advised him that Frangieh needed to forge more foreign relations, especially in the region. Frangieh would later reveal to me that the 'friend' was none other than Nasrallah, who urged Assad to extend Lahoud's term, a decision that would be costly for Syria after Hariri's assassination. Hezbollah made presidents and governments in Lebanon. It kept the presidential palace vacant for two-and-half years so that it would be able to elect Michel Aoun as president, putting him at odds with Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri from day one of his term. Can a party that used to change Assad's decisions and that sent advisers to Yemen and Iraq return to the Lebanese map without its rockets? Will the party assume the responsibility for the isolation that will befall Lebanon if it insists on hanging on to its arsenal or if it sparks a new Israeli war on Lebanon? The party has lost its strong leader, its influence in Syria, and its ability to fight Israel, so what role does its arsenal have left to play? Can it take the decision to lay down its arms?
Al Arabiya
40 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
Israel kills dozens in Gaza; Kremlin awaits Trump envoy ahead of sanctions deadline
In this episode of W News, presented by Leigh-Ann Gerrans, we report on the ongoing war in Gaza, where health officials say at least 40 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli gunfire and airstrikes, including 10 who were seeking aid. We also cover the Kremlin's statement that it expects 'important' talks later this week with US President Donald Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, ahead of Trump's looming deadline to impose new sanctions on Russia unless it makes progress toward a peace deal in Ukraine. Guests: Moshe Elad – Middle East specialist Ahmed Fattouh – Fatah spokesperson Dasha Chernyshova – Correspondent Ander Antikov – Political analyst
Al Arabiya
40 minutes ago
- Al Arabiya
US states must reject Israel boycotts to receive federal emergency funding
US states and cities that boycott Israeli companies will be denied federal aid for natural disaster preparedness, the Trump administration has announced, tying routine federal funding to its political stance. The Federal Emergency Management Agency stated in grant notices posted on Friday that states must follow its 'terms and conditions.' Those conditions require they certify they will not sever 'commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies' to qualify for funding. The requirement applies to at least $1.9 billion that states rely on to cover search-and-rescue equipment, emergency manager salaries and backup power systems among other expenses, according to 11 agency grant notices reviewed by Reuters. The requirement is the Trump administration's latest effort to use federal funding to promote its views on Israel. The Department of Homeland Security, the agency that oversees FEMA, in April said that boycotting Israel is prohibited for states and cities receiving its grant funds. FEMA separately said in July that US states will be required to spend part of their federal terrorism prevention funds on helping the government arrest migrants, an administration priority. The Israel requirement takes aim at BDS, the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement designed to put economic pressure on Israel to end its occupation of Palestinian territories. The campaign's supporters grew more vocal in 2023, after Hamas attacked southern Israel and Israel invaded Gaza in response. 'DHS will enforce all antidiscrimination laws and policies, including as it relates to the BDS movement, which is expressly grounded in antisemitism,' a spokesperson for Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said in a statement. The requirement is largely symbolic. At least 34 states already have anti-BDS laws or policies, according to a University of Pennsylvania law journal. The BDS Movement did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The American Jewish Committee supports the Trump administration's policy, said Holly Huffnagle, the group's director of antisemitism policy. The AJC is an advocacy group that supports Israel. Under one of the grant notices posted on Friday, FEMA will require major cities to agree to the Israel policy to receive a cut of $553.5 million set aside to prevent terrorism in dense areas. New York is due to receive $92.2 million from the program, the most of all the recipients. Allocations are based on the agency's analysis of 'relative risk of terrorism,' according to the notice.
