Hamas rejects new Gaza ceasefire conditions put forth by Israel

Talks stall as Hamas rejects Israel's conditions, including military presence in the Philadelphi Corridor


Reuters August 25, 2024
Palestinians inspect damage in Qatari-funded Hamad City, following an Israeli raid, in Khan Younis, in the southern Gaza Strip, August 24, 2024. PHOTO: REUTERS

Listen to article
CAIRO:

Hamas said on Sunday that it rejects new Israeli conditions put forward in Gaza ceasefire talks, casting further doubt on the chances of a breakthrough in the latest US-backed effort to end the 10-month-old war.

Months of on-off talks have failed to produce an agreement to end Israel's devastating military campaign in Gaza or free the remaining hostages seized by Hamas in the militant group's Oct. 7 attack on Israel that triggered the war.

Key sticking points in ongoing talks mediated by the United States, Egypt and Qatar include an Israeli presence in the so-called Philadelphi Corridor, a narrow 14.5 km-long (nine-mile) stretch of land along Gaza's southern border with Egypt.

Hamas said Israel has backtracked on a commitment to withdraw troops from the Corridor and put forward other new conditions, including the screening of displaced Palestinians as they return to the enclave's more heavily populated north when the ceasefire begins.

Read also: Gaza ceasefire talks in Cairo stall without progress

"We will not accept discussions about retractions from what we agreed to on July 2 or new conditions," Hamas official Osama Hamdan told the group's Al-Aqsa TV on Sunday.

In July, Hamas accepted a US proposal to begin talks on releasing Israeli hostages, including soldiers and men, 16 days after the first phase of an agreement aimed at ending the Gaza war, a senior Hamas source has told Reuters.

Hamdan also said Hamas has handed to mediators its response to the latest proposal, saying US talk of an imminent deal is false.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ