Tensions have suddenly surged between the US and Israel in a way unprecedented since US President Donald Trump took office in January and then took every step possible to demonstrate his support for Israel and its policies.
However, his administration recently riled Israel by entering into direct talks with Hamas. Tel Aviv feels that Washington should have asked for its approval before offering negotiating proposals involving hostages held by Hamas who are not just US but also Israeli nationals.
But for many observers it is Israeli conduct, and the US indulgence of it, that has propelled the US in this direction through Israel’s weeks of obstructing the transition to the second stage of the ceasefire in Gaza, prompting Hamas to refuse to extend the agreement.
This has left the US, which seeks to end the war for reasons related to its regional and international objectives, with no choice but to speak with Hamas directly.
The US hopes to secure the release of the last living American hostage — Edan Alexander, a dual US-Israel national who served in the Israeli military — and four deceased US-Israeli hostages.
According to reports, Tel Aviv has also been angered by the US’ refusal to heed its advise not to negotiate with Hamas without preconditions. Nevertheless, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has avoided criticising Trump or his team publicly.
Tel Aviv has been incensed by news leaks saying that the talks between the US and Hamas went beyond hostage-exchange negotiations to discussing proposals for reaching a broader and more durable truce.
One US proposal reportedly offered Hamas leaders a safe passage out of Gaza. Hamas adamantly rejected the suggestion, but it indicates that the US is open to exploring all ideas, including the number of Palestinian detainees Israel would release in exchange for the American hostage.
Naturally, Hamas would apply a similar approach to hostage negotiations with the US as it does with Israel. It would not hand over a hostage for nothing in return. However, as long as the US is willing to deal with Hamas pragmatically, Hamas leaders would be inclined to reciprocate in the same spirit of pragmatism that they show in any of their direct dealings with countries other than Israel.
Even though Washington is the main supporter of the Israeli occupation and military machine, Hamas officials understand that maintaining open and direct channels of communication with a power of the stature of the US affords the group an unprecedented level of legitimacy.
The unprecedented direct talks between Washington and Hamas might encourage other powers to follow suit. Up until this point, the US had preconditioned any direct communication with Hamas on the movement’s recognition of Israel, disarmament, and recognition of previous agreements with Israel, primarily the Oslo Agreement in the 1990s.
This shift in policy signals a deterioration in Washington’s trust in Netanyahu, who has all but made his intention to sabotage the truce explicit. The Trump administration’s initiative, which it took without notifying Israel in advance, has somewhat altered the US’ image as subservient and manipulable by Israel.
Hamas hopes to build on this initiative and the spirit of pragmatism it represents to reach a long term ceasefire, on which negotiations with the US have already begun, while also ensuring a role for Hamas in any future political framework in Gaza. It might also try to take advantage of the opportunity to alleviate pressures on its regional allies.
With the shift in tactics, the US and Hamas now appear aligned on the need to end the war, while Israel is eager to resume it. Israel will need to find some way to undermine that alignment, perhaps by insisting on Hamas’ disarmament as a precondition for further progress.
However, the US takes a different approach on that question as well, especially given Hamas’ frequently stated rejection of Tel Aviv’s insistence on its disarmament in advance of a clear path forward to a long-term ceasefire.
Perhaps the main variable that explains the shift in the US approach towards the war on Gaza is the return of Trump. It appears that, as with other US allies, he is determined to establish clear boundaries between US and Israeli interests when necessary, and to prioritise the former.
In this case, Washington opposes the perpetuation of the Israeli war on Gaza because it could reignite wider conflicts and instability, possibly dragging the US into a war it does not want.
For the first time since October 2023, the US and Israel have arrived at a fork in the road, with the two countries set on divergent paths on certain issues that could undermine the Israeli position in the peace negotiations.
On the other hand, some observers caution against being overly optimistic. If the current talks hit an impasse, Israel will regain the initiative. In addition, the US and Israel remain aligned on most other major issues, including the Israeli determination to eliminate the Palestinian cause.
Even so, direct US-Hamas talks offer the first opening, since October 2023, to drive a wedge between the US and Israel on the question of prolonging the war.
According to US Special Envoy for Hostage Affairs Adam Boehler, Hamas negotiators have submitted a proposal for a comprehensive agreement that would include a five-to-ten-year ceasefire in exchange for the release of all the US and Israeli hostages.
During that period, Hamas would completely disarm, cease military activity in Gaza, and withdraw from the political scene, in exchange for US and international guarantees for an end to all military activities in Gaza.
Hamas has yet to comment on Boehler’s statement, which appears to contradict Hamas’ declared refusal to disarm.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 13 March, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: