The Al-Aqsa flood operation on October 7, 2023 constituted a lightning surprise for the occupation state, as it opened a gap in the wall of its security feeling, which it thought was tight and difficult to penetrate.
The losses suffered at all levels were heavy, beyond expectations. But more importantly, the morale of its army is lost and thus the Jew’s confidence in his state and army. That is why this state resorts to obtaining a period of calm to rebuild the morale and nationalism of this army by holding truces.
However, it is known that the occupying Power has a dishonorable and long history of entering into military truces and then violating them. The most famous of these truces was the armistice of 1948 that this state signed with the Arab armies. It was in its favor as it armed and restructured its gangs and violated the truce when it attacked Palestinian villages and destroyed them completely.
Today, in its war on Gaza 2023-2024, we saw what happened after the truce between the occupation state and Hamas, which began on November 24, 2023 and included a four-day ceasefire, which can be extended.
It has already been extended for seven days, during which the hostages were released from both sides. However, as usual, it violated this truce by shooting at Palestinians, leading to the death of a number of Palestinians. It also refused to bring aid into the northern Gaza Strip. In addition to violating the agreement regarding the prisoners’ file, which included the release of prisoners on the basis of seniority.
At dawn on the day that the truce ended, the army published a map of what it called the evacuation zones in the Gaza Strip, and began launching successive violent waves in the north, south and center of the Strip. Hundreds of massacres were committed against civilians, and this indicates that the Jews have no covenants.
As for the subsequent negotiations on a new truce, which took place through Qatar and Egypt, where they played the role of mediator between the occupying power and Hamas, they did not succeed. The occupying Power accused the movement of being the reason for the obstruction of the alleged truce.
It is an unmistakable fact that the movement has conditioned a comprehensive cessation of aggression against Gaza and the commencement of relief, shelter and reconstruction operations with international guarantees.
The occupying Power was only evasive, giving no clear guarantees and commitments with regard to the issue of a ceasefire and a cessation of aggression. From this standpoint, the following question arises: Why does this state reject such a condition and assume the role of the good man who seeks with his hands and feet towards a truce, and attaches the obstruction process to Hamas?
And why should Hamas, from the point of view of the occupier, accept a truce without guarantees? Although it says that it remains open to continuing negotiations? Is the aim to demonize Hamas in front of the world, which has become fully aware of the reality of this country after the mask fell off its ugly face?