A news report discussing "Why Hamas gambled on giving up Gaza hostages" would likely center on the strategic and political considerations that led the group to agree a deal, despite using the hostages as leverage.
Based on the general context of Israel-Hamas deals, the summary would likely highlight the following point, the primary motivation is to secure a halt to the fighting and a withdrawal or pullback of Israeli forces from parts of the Gaza Strip, as outlined in the multi-phase agreement. For Hamas, this provides critical respite from the military operation.
Hamas might have gambled on deal holding, based on American assurances that Israel would not immediately resume the war once the hostages are released.
A core, perpetual goal for Hamas is release of Palestinian security prisoners held by Israel. The deal involves release of a significant number of these prisoners, including those serving life sentences, which is a major victory for Hamas among its supporters, despite the ratio of prisoners to hostages in specific deal being reportedly lower than in past exchanges.
The deal often includes provisions increased humanitarian aid to Gaza, which is facing severe devastation. A ceasefire also offers Hamas chance to regroup, rearm, and reorganize its forces and tunnel networks after facing intense military pressure.
By agreeing a deal that halts the war and forces an Israeli pullback, Hamas can claim a political victory against Israel's stated goal of completely eliminating the group. A pause in fighting also helps ensure the survival of its leadership and military capabilities.
In short, the "gamble" for Hamas is exchanging the most valuable leverage (the hostages) for a guaranteed pause in fighting, an Israeli military pullback, and the release of numerous Palestinian prisoners, while risking that subsequent phases of the deal or overall peace plan (which often calls for Hamas to disarm) may be unpalatable or collapse later.
Comment
