Read on Twitter
A 🧵on ceasefires. In my experience, 3 elements are normally needed. Readiness by both sides to stop fighting (on conditions). A broker to negotiate a deal. And int supervision to give confidence that both sides will respect the terms. Gaza conflict is not at this point yet 1/6
On readiness to stop fighting, Netanyahu seeks destruction of Hamas (impossible - he will have to settle for enough damage done to its mil power) + release of all hostages. Hamas demands release of all Palestinian prisoners in Israel in return. Tough negotiation lies ahead 2/6
The honest broker role has usually been the US using mix of diplomatic weight and mil muscle. Think Kissinger (1973 ME war), Habib (1982 Lebanon), Holbrooke (1995 Bosnia). Sometimes a group can work (Ahtisaari/Chernenko forced Milosevic to accept a G8 plan on Kosovo in 1999) 3/6
In Gaza, no single broker w’d have confidence of both sides. It will need a group involving eg US, Egypt, Qatar. There will have to be arm-twisting to get both sides to the table. Only US can pressure Israel: the rift over a humanitarian pause is a first public sign of this 4/6
On int supervision of a ceasefire, in the past this has often been UN blue-helmets or a UN-authorised US-led peacekeeping force. Neither looks feasible given state of Israel/UN relations and risks to Western troops in Gaza. Some form of multilateral force from Arab states? 5/6
Finally, is there any point in calling for a ceasefire? Depends on your objective. If you want to take a principled position, then yes, absolutely. If your interest is in practical proposals as a first step to a ceasefire, then a humanitarian pause has to be the priority 6/6
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
