Israel and America.. A well-crafted negotiation plan

It is clear that the new American proposal that is being discussed will be presented to the Palestinian resistance, with Hamas at its heart, and to Israel most likely next Friday, and it comes within the framework of a well-crafted Israeli-American plan to distribute roles between them. Every time, the Americans bring their political and security teams to the region: Secretary of State Blinken, CIA Director William Burns, John Kirby, Senior Advisor to the US Administration for Strategic Communications, and Brett McGurk, Senior Advisor to the US Administration for the Middle East, to pressure for the completion of a prisoner exchange deal, and what they call bridging the gap between viewpoints. At the end of each round, we hear the same refrain: holding Hamas and the resistance responsible for the failure of the deal, even though the one who rejects and makes it fail is Netanyahu himself. The best example of this is the last time, during the Jewish Blinken's ninth visit to Israel, it was said that he was coming to pressure Netanyahu to agree to the American initiative of May 31, and we find that he agreed to Netanyahu's security conditions regarding the continuation of Israeli control over the Philadelphi Corridor and the Netzarim Corridor, and the conditions related to the release of Palestinian prisoners, and the return of the displaced from the southern Gaza Strip to its northern part, which he wanted Hamas to agree to, otherwise it would bear responsibility for the failure of the negotiations and the deal. And when Hamas and the resistance said that they were adhering to the original text of the American initiative of May 31, 2024, and after the killing of six Israeli prisoners, and the widespread protests that Israel witnessed, in which the Histadrut Trade Union Federation participated, Netanyahu took responsibility for their killing and the failure to complete the deal, we found that America, through its president, came out to say that it would present a final proposal to Hamas and the resistance on the one hand, and to Israel on the other hand, either to be fully accepted, or to be completely rejected. Since America is not an honest or neutral mediator, and is a partner in this war, Israeli demands will be present in this proposal at the expense of Palestinian rights. This means that this proposal is a middle ground between the original American initiative and Netanyahu’s security demands, meaning that it will meet part of Netanyahu’s security demands and deprive the Palestinians of part of their rights. The Palestinians must agree to this through the pressures that will be exerted on them by the Arab mediators, otherwise they will bear responsibility for the failure of the deal and the continuation of the aggressive war on the Strip. It is forbidden to hold Netanyahu responsible for the failure of these negotiations and the prisoner exchange deal, because that means support and victory for the position of Hamas and the resistance, and encouragement of what Netanyahu calls “terrorism.” Osama Hamdan, a leader in the Hamas movement, anticipated this new American proposal or initiative by saying, “There is no need for new initiatives or proposals, but rather forcing Netanyahu to accept the American initiative in its original form that Hamas and the resistance agreed to.” This American proposal comes in order to absorb the growing Israeli anger in the Israeli street against the backdrop of the killing of six Israeli prisoners in the hands of the Palestinian resistance, and for the families of the prisoners and many Israeli leaders, both military and political, such as Gantz, Eisenkot, Lapid, Reserve Colonel Yitzhak Brick, and Galant, to hold Netanyahu responsible for not completing the deal. Perhaps the US government and the US Department of Justice anticipated the new American proposal with a decision by the US Attorney General, as the United States announced yesterday, Wednesday (Tuesday, local US time) the filing of criminal charges against senior leaders of the Hamas movement, including the head of the movement’s political bureau, Yahya Sinwar, accusing them of leading efforts aimed at killing civilians and destroying the State of Israel.
“As detailed in our lawsuit, these defendants, armed with weapons, political support and funding from the government of Iran and backed by Hezbollah, led Hamas’s efforts to destroy the State of Israel and murder civilians in support of that goal,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.

The French News Agency added: "The Attorney General also said in his statement that they - Hamas leaders - financed and led a campaign over decades to kill American citizens and endanger the security of the United States."
"The accusations revealed yesterday, Wednesday, are only one part of our efforts to target every aspect of Hamas' operations. These measures will not be the last," he said in his statement.
We are fully aware that the US administration does not dare and does not want to tell Netanyahu, either accept the US-American initiative, or face a ban on the flow of American weapons. This administration, Netanyahu’s partner in this war, and the owner of its idea, is the one leading the war militarily and security-wise against our people in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Therefore, it preempted US President Biden’s new proposal with a new decision from its Minister of Justice, accusing six Hamas leaders of terrorism and seeking to destroy the State of Israel, killing civilians, and even threatening US national security. Therefore, in order to convince Netanyahu to accept the new proposal, which takes a large part of its security requirements into consideration at the expense of Palestinian rights, and even if Biden’s new proposal is not approved by Hamas and the Palestinian resistance, or by Netanyahu, Hamas and the resistance will be responsible for its failure in both cases. Netanyahu is forbidden from being held responsible for the failure. Perhaps the US threat to withdraw from the alleged mediation will lead the “Israeli-American dispute” group to say that we must remain open to America and not waste opportunities, as if the opportunities lie in making concessions and raising the flag of surrender from the other side. The Palestinian. This is how the countries of the official Arab system were raised historically and in all the negotiations they conducted with the occupying state, that concessions and relinquishing rights are the masters of the situation, under the name of realism and rationality. Perhaps Biden’s threat to withdraw may push the countries of the collapsed official Arab system to say that we must hold a sit-in until Biden changes his decision. “We are comforted by his mediation and feel lonely if he withdraws.”
If Netanyahu is besieged internally and externally, and because the US administration wants the Arab-Islamic vote in order to improve Kamala Harris’s chances of winning the US presidential elections on October 5, and to abort and prevent the escalation of the internal protest movement against him due to his refusal to complete the prisoner exchange deal, he may agree to implement the first phase of it, where he recovers a fair number of his prisoners, restores his image and popularity with the Israeli public, and then resumes his military operations in the Strip. There are no binding guarantees preventing him from doing so, and no bets on any mediator, especially since all the US proposals and formulations since the first round, and until now, talk about a ceasefire, not ending the aggression, and about recovering the kidnapped, not exchanging prisoners.