US: Hostage talks obstacles can be resolved

The United States continued to project optimism as the prospects for a hostage deal by the start of Ramadan on Sunday seemed to dim and talks in Cairo failed to yield any perceivable progress.

“We continue to believe that the obstacles are not insurmountable and that a deal can be reached,” US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller told reporters in Washington.

Such a “deal is in the interest of Israel. It’s in the interest of the Palestinian people, and it’s in the interest of the broader region. So we’re going to continue to push for one.”

Miller said that Israel had “put a serious proposal on the table, and it’s for Hamas to accept it. It’s also for Hamas to engage in good faith and show that they actually want to get a deal.

“And we’re going to continue to engage on good faith on our behalf and continue to try to get a deal over the finish line,” Miller said.

The US believes that a deal is “possible, and we’re going to continue to push for it,” he stressed.

In Cairo, Egyptian and Qatari officials mediating the deal met with Hamas, in an attempt to secure a six-week pause to the war in exchange for the release of 40 remaining 134 hostages.

Hamas pledged to continue to take part in the Cairo talks, but officials in the terror group said a ceasefire must be in place before hostages are freed, Israeli forces must leave Gaza and all Gazans must be able to return to homes they have fled.

“We are showing the required flexibility in order to reach a comprehensive cessation of aggression against our people, but the “occupation” is still evading the entitlements of this agreement,” Hamas said in a statement.

A source had said earlier that Israel was staying away from the Cairo talks because Hamas refused to provide a list of hostages who are still alive. Hamas says this is impossible without a ceasefire as hostages are scattered across the war zone.

The deal presented to Hamas for Gaza would allow for increased humanitarian assistance and for the release

would be an opportune time to do just that. In any event, he had already said he intended to step down.

And the commission said former religious services minister Ya’akov Avitan, who is no longer in national politics, should never be appointed a minister again.

Since there is no recommendation regarding Netanyahu, and the recommendations against the others don’t have much bite, the question becomes: What does bearing responsibility mean? This question, moreover, is all the more pertinent in light of the events of October 7.

Several political and military leaders have taken responsibility for the October 7 fiasco, though Netanyahu is not among them. Nevertheless, even those who have taken responsibility, such as Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Herzi Halevi and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, remain in their positions.

One could argue that the midst of a war is not the best time to remove key players responsible for the fiasco, because who will run the war in their absence?

But if they are not removed – and this is something the Meron incident illustrates – might the country not find itself in a situation three years down the line where the same people under whose watch October 7 transpired will remain in their positions?

Does anyone think it will take a future state commission of inquiry into October 7 less time to issue a report than it took the commission investigating the Meron tragedy – and only one person, Israel Police Northern District commander Shimon Lavi, voluntarily left his position before those findings were released?

No one expects that as a result of Wednesday’s report, Netanyahu will step down, or Ohana will do the same. Since the report recommends no harsher sanctions, those listed in it could be forgiven for saying, “OK, the commission found me responsible – life goes on.”

So what is the significance of the report?

First, it is significant because even before the final report was issued, and after interim findings were released, the situation at Meron changed dramatically. The physical site underwent changes, making it more secure, and limitations were placed on how many people are allowed at the site on Lag Ba’omer.

A similar result is likely following the preliminary findings that will be released by a state commission of inquiry, which is expected to be established following October 7, at least regarding the physical defenses and the number of soldiers who will be positioned to guard border communities.

It is when dealing with the question of responsibility, and what that means, that matters become more complicated.

Soon after the Meron tragedy, Ohana, in response to those calling for his resignation, admitted responsibility, but said: “Responsibility does not mean blame.” In other words, responsibility does not mean accountability.

This is the same thing Shabtai said when he testified before the three-person commission.

“I have responsibility for everything that happens in the Israeli police,” he said, before shifting blame from himself to the head of the Northern District, the political echelon, and engineers. “The question is whether responsibility is blame.”

In this country, at least up until now, responsibility has not meant blame. This is why Shabtai could remain in office three years after the Meron tragedy, and why Netanyahu will feel no compunction to resign, even though the commission just determined that he bears personal responsibility.

And that is a problem. Why is it important not only to say, “I am responsible,” but also, “I am responsible and am leaving?” Because only the latter creates a culture of accountability; only the latter sends a message to those in public positions of trust that if they want the job – which comes with immense responsibility but also with popular perks such as power, prestige, and high salaries – that when something bad happens on their watch, they can’t say, “I had overall responsibility, but the nuts and bolts were someone else’s business.”

No, those with ultimate responsibility need to make sure that the nuts and bolts are all in place, and if they don’t do that, they will not only be held responsible but also be held accountable.

As unpleasant as it sounds, sometimes heads need to roll for even unintentional mistakes, oversights, and omissions. Not because of a primal urge to punish anyone, but rather to send the message to others that vigilance and diligence are demanded of those holding this country’s most sensitive positions.

Those who do not learn from their mistakes are bound to repeat them. If there is no culture of accountability, and if there is no price for major mistakes that cost dozens of lives, there is no incentive for anyone to learn anything from those mistakes.

The commission of inquiry into the Meron tragedy said clearly on Wednesday who it holds responsible. It will now be left to the public to hold them accountable, and one of the beauties of democracy is that the ballot box gives the public the ability to do just that. •