The Hebrew Bible presents the Canaanites as a relatively homogenous group of pagan tribes who inhabited the Land of Israel and its environs when Abraham first arrived there, and remained until the era of the Davidic monarchy. Based on ancient DNA gathered from 93 different bodies buried at nine separate locations, from a period of over a millennium, scientists have confirmed this portrait. Amanda Borschel-Dan writes:

“The Canaanites, although living in different city-states, were culturally and genetically similar,” said the Hebrew University ancient-DNA specialist Liran Carmel. . . . The study also discovered that they shared a genetic relationship with another group of people who slowly and continuously migrated from the far-away Caucasus and/or Zagros Mountain regions. [The latter range stretches from southwestern Turkey, through northern Iraq, and across western Iran.] This special genetic mix of Canaanite and mountain peoples can still be seen in some form in modern Arabic-speaking and Jewish populations, wrote the authors.

In Carmel said that Bronze Age (circa 3500-1150 BCE) populations in the southern Levant—today’s Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, and parts of Syria—were not static. “Rather, we observe evidence for the movement of people over long periods of time from the northeast of the Ancient Near East, including modern-day Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan, into the southern Levant region,” he said.

Even though Canaanites lived in different city-states, archaeological evidence has always suggested that they presented a common material culture. And indeed, as the paper explained, this homogeneity was found mirrored also in their genetic ancestry.

Considering the current state of Israel-Arab relations, Ghaith al-Omari writes

First and foremost, no ceasefire will be possible without the release of Israeli hostages and commitments to disarm Hamas and remove it from power. The final say on these matters rests with Hamas commanders on the ground in Gaza, who have been largely impervious to foreign pressure so far. At minimum, however, the United States should insist that Qatari and Egyptian mediators push Hamas’s external leadership to accept these conditions publicly, which could increase pressure on the group’s Gaza leadership.

Washington should also demand a clear, public position from key Arab states regarding disarmament. The Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas endorsed this position in a June letter to Saudi Arabia and France, giving Arab states Palestinian cover for endorsing it themselves.

Some Arab states have already indicated a willingness to play a significant role, but they will have little incentive to commit resources and personnel to Gaza unless Israel (1) provides guarantees that it will not occupy the Strip indefinitely, and (2) removes its veto on a PA role in Gaza’s future, even if only symbolic at first. Arab officials are also seeking assurances that any role they play in Gaza will be in the context of a wider effort to reach a two-state solution.

On the other hand, Washington must remain mindful that current conditions between Israel and the Palestinians are not remotely conducive to . . . implementing a two-state solution.