In the latest round of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, there has been an unexpected subtle change in the attitudes of Middle Eastern countries. Countries that once sided with Hamas have taken a tougher stance as the conflict continues. The focus has been on a ceasefire agreement proposed by Egypt. This is not an initiative of Israel or the United States, but of the Middle Eastern country of Egypt and the mediator Qatar.
The rejection of the agreement by Hamas and Jihad has raised concerns not about the rejection itself, but about the essence of "Kaesong surrender" behind the agreement. This means that countries in the Middle East may be undergoing a subtle change in their stance of supporting Hamas, and are tending to force Hamas to "surrender". What triggered this tipping point shift is a let's take a closer look at the new trends in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
In a recent series of reports on the Middle East, we have seen some striking and interesting events. These include support for Hamas's shift to forced surrender, Egypt's proposal for a land-for-peace ceasefire agreement, and Israel's dream of a result. These incidents not only affect the situation in the entire region, but also reveal the intertwined interests and subtle changes of all parties. First, let's look at Hamas. Hamas, the ruling party in the Gaza Strip, has been committed to opposing Israel since coming to power and has claimed that it will not surrender to it. In the latest developments, we have seen that some countries have begun to support forcing Hamas to accept the terms of surrender and change their positions. This subtle change is indicative of the outside world's judgment of the organization's declining strength and intensifying internal contradictions.
The ceasefire agreement, proposed by Egypt and raised concerns, further underscores the situation. Egypt proposed a land-for-peace solution to the question of Palestine and called on both sides to reach a consensus. This proposal has sparked widespread controversy. Some believe that this is a dream result for Israel, as they can get more land and security guarantees through the agreement. At the same time, however, there are doubts as to whether such an approach is in the interests of the Palestinian people, fearing that it will lead to the loss of more territory and rights.
In terms of mediation, we have to note that the identity of Qatar raises great doubts. As another financier of Hamas, the country is trying to play a major role in the Middle East and influence the situation. Over the past few years, Qatar has developed tensions with other Arab countries and has been accused of supporting terrorist organizations. Therefore, caution must be considered when considering its mediating power. There are subtle changes within Hamas. Despite the Gaza militants' vows to fight to the death and their firm opposition to the terms of surrender, Qatar's top brass reportedly urged an end to the war as soon as possible and a ceasefire agreement. This is yet another proof of the intertwined and complex interests of all parties.
At the same time, "indiscriminate" attacks in the Red Sea have also become a factor of influence. The Houthis used ballistic missiles and drones to attack cargo ships passing through the Red Sea, putting pressure on Israel and putting pressure on Middle Eastern countries. The Houthis' behavior in the Red Sea is "temporary", but it has undoubtedly divided the Islamic world again. This "double-edged sword" has had a negative impact on the international community and shipping in the Middle East, and may be one of the factors that prompted Middle Eastern countries to force Hamas to surrender.
Now, the game between the countries of the Middle East and Israel is entering a critical moment. On the one hand, Israel has called for a ceasefire and expressed its readiness to provide additional humanitarian assistance. On the other hand, countries in the Middle East began to sue for peace "without a bottom line", and the "surrender agreement" concocted by Egypt and Qatar demanded that Hamas "hand over Gaza". This is a test of the "patience" of the countries of the Middle East and Israel. If Israel can't bear it, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could end in Hamas's favorIf the countries of the Middle East fail to bear it, the conflict may end in Israel's favor.
The report mentioned that the "transit fee" of the Suez Canal is as high as 9.4 billion US dollars a year, which is a huge loss for Middle Eastern countries. The Houthis' actions directly led to this loss, and Qatar's support for the "surrender agreement" actually represents the attitude of Saudi Arabia. Through this agreement, the countries of the Middle East hope to pressure the Houthis and the powers behind them (Russia and Iran) to prevent them from creating chaos again in the Red Sea. This game is not only a geopolitical contest, but also a clash of interests between countries.
The intent behind the agreement may not really be to hope that Hamas will "surrender in Kaesong", but more to pressure the Houthis. This complex game has made the entire Middle East situation full of uncertainty. The relations and entanglement of interests between the countries of the Middle East and Israel will determine the ultimate direction of this game. At the moment, this seemingly game against Hamas is actually a big test of geopolitics in the Middle East, and the development of the situation is even more confusing.
Finally, it is important to emphasize that the outcome of this game is full of controversy. The Egyptian-Qatari agreement may only be a stopgap measure to stabilize the situation in the Middle East and avoid a larger conflict. It also makes people wonder whether they are pursuing peace or catering to their own interestsWhat the future of the Middle East will do is still an unknown question. This game is not only a contest between Hamas and Israel, but also a profound evolution of geopolitics in the Middle East.