CEASEFIRE DEAL

 

 

 

 

THOUGH a ceasefire deal has been struck between Israel and Hamas, given the history of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and the intricacies involved, peace may prevail until the next trigger. Since the attacks on Israel by Hamas served as the trigger of the latest conflict, Hamas has to make a conscious effort for temporary tranquility to bloom into prolonged peace. Whenever a conflict breaks out, narratives are built from both the parties involved. If one side presents a picture of atrocity by the other side, another party also presents contesting pictures of greater atrocity heaped by the former. In case of Israel-Palestine conflict, smoke billowing out of the targets struck by either sides clouded the global opinion. Various powers of the world, instead of taking a rational stand, resorted to politically (read, interest-serving) correct stand. Given the present global scenario, peace is the best interest that the global community must work to secure. It is probably out of this consideration that Qatar, Egypt, and the US have mediated for the four-day temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. In these four days, Hamas will release 50 hostages in exchange of 150 Palestinian detainees. Israel has promised one more day of respite with release of every 10 additional hostages held by Hamas.

 

This is a major breakthrough in the conflict that has placed Israel in a resolutely firm position since it first broke out because of aggressive terrorist actions by Hamas on October 7. After advancing into the Hamas strongholds also, now Israel has agreed to the ceasefire. This reflects the willingness of Israel for peace to prevail, from a position of strength. It is against this backdrop that Hamas and its supporters in countries around Israel and elsewhere need to show their willingness for peace through sustained positive calm. If Hamas and its supporters indulge in any kind of radical acts by way of resorting to misadventure, they will solely be responsible for the escalation of the situation. In such a case, the global community will definitely suspect Hamas’ intentions. In fact, most of the global powers may be constrained then to form a united response against Hamas extremists, out of the consideration for stability in global supply chains. For, any act of aggression snowballing into a regional conflict affects global supply chains in a negative manner. This has been proven not so long ago during the Russia-Ukraine conflict. In the post-COVID recovery of global economy, Russia-Ukraine conflict posed a major challenge at different levels.

 

In this context, the appeal of Indian Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi, from the forum of virtual G20 Leaders’ Summit, bears significance. Mr. Modi has appealed to the global leaders to ensure that Israel-Hamas war does not take the shape of a regional conflict. His appeal is not only consistent with India’s stand but also with the interest of humanity. Because, if Israel-Hamas war takes the shape of a regional conflict, thanks to some elements in that region extending support to Hamas, it may have a disastrous effect on global trade and stability. In the present situation, the world cannot afford to face two supply chain disruptions -- one in Russia-Ukraine theatre and another in Israel-Hamas theatre. The world and its citizens, who are rebuilding their lives after the COVID-19 pandemic, are weary of violence leading to migration of millions of people from certain countries to developed economies, and subsequent disturbances in host societies. This weariness may force the people and their respective countries to adopt a stand against countries or organisations that stoke trouble for the whole world.