Last week, U.S. media reported that the head of the Mossad came to Washington in July and met with senior American officials about the possibility of establishing formal diplomatic relations between Jerusalem and Riyadh—also the apparent subject of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan’s recent visit to the kingdom. The response to these developments from some quarters, including pro-Israel ones, is that such an agreement might “throw the Palestinians under the bus,” as one headline put it. Hussain Abdul-Hussain strongly disagrees:

Saudi Arabia has come to recognize a basic truth about the Israel-Palestinian conflict: the Arab world can do little to help Palestinians unless they are willing to help themselves. Palestinian salvation starts from within and requires a clear vision of peace with Israel that Palestinian leaders have thus far spurned.

Last week, Palestinian factions held a conference in Egypt. In their final statement, the factions said that the Palestine Liberation Organization was the sole representative of all Palestinians and that its vision for a two-state solution was their only plan. Such a position guarantees that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and many other armed factions will remain at odds with the Palestinian Authority. Palestinians still have no credible representative or interlocutor who can negotiate peace with Israel, let alone uphold any agreements with the Jewish state.

With all tools of confrontation against Israel exhausted, and with Palestinians’ inability to speak with one voice and agree on one vision, Arab countries are left with two choices: either continue boycotting Israel, at a considerable economic cost and without a clear objective or outcome, or normalize with the Jewish state.

Neither an Arab boycott nor Arab peace with Israel will affect Palestinians. The Arabs have tried boycott and war for 75 years and have achieved little. Perhaps signing [an agreement] and reasoning with Israel over the best way to mitigate Palestinian misery can help.

Two of the most important questions about the recent agreement with Hamas are “Why now?” and “What is the relationship between the deal and the military campaign?” To Ron Ben-Yishai, the answer to the two questions is related, and flies in the face of the widespread (and incorrect) claim that the same agreement could have been reached in May:

Contrary to certain public perceptions, the military pressure exerted on northern Gaza in recent months was the main leverage that led to flexibility on the part of Hamas and made clear to the terror group that it would do well to agree to a deal now, before thousands more of its fighters are killed, and before the IDF advances further and destroys Gaza entirely.

Andrew Fox, meanwhile, presents a more comprehensive strategic analysis of the cease-fire:

Tactically, Hamas has taken a severe beating in Gaza since October 2023. It is assessed that it has lost as much as 90 percent of military capability and 80 percent of manpower, although it has recruited well and boosted its numbers from below 10,000 to the 20–30,000 range. However, these are untrained recruits, often under-age, and the IDF has been striking their training camps in northern Gaza so they have been unable to form any kind of meaningful capability. This is not a fighting force that retains any ability to harm the IDF in real numbers, although, as seen this past week with a fatal IED attack, they are able to score the odd hit.

However, this has not affected Hamas’s ability to retain administrative control of Gaza.

Internationally, Hamas sits alone in glory on the information battlefield. It has won the most resounding victory imaginable in the world’s media, in Western states, and on the Internet. . . . The stock of the Palestinian cause rides high internationally and will only get higher as Hamas proclaims a victory following this cease-fire deal. By means of political pressure on Israel, the international information campaign has kept Hamas in the fight, extended the war, prolonged the suffering of Gazan civilians, and has ultimately handed Hamas a win through the fact of their continued survival and eventual rebuild.

Indeed, writes Fox in a separate post, the “images coming out of Gaza over the last few days show us that too many in the wider world have been played for fools.”

Hamas fighters have been seen emerging from hospitals and the humanitarian zone. Well-fed Palestinians, with fresh haircuts and Adidas tracksuits, or in just vests, cheer for the camera. . . . There was no starvation. There was no freezing. There was no genocide.