- Apr 23, 2016
- 33,687
- 48,206
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Yes it is, and the latest ceasefire resolution which was the first one passed by the UNSC did exactly that by offering a phased end to the war, hostages returned and a initial cease fire with commitments to a longer term ceasefire.
I see no issue with not taking that deal right now. It stops pain and suffering on both sides. Then a future statehood solution can be worked on with eventually a permanent 2 state solution to be decided on for the 3rd time since 1948. I'd expect severe punishment and consequences for either side if they do not accept the eventual permanent two state solution with full independence for both sides.
You assume Israel have actually agreed. The US said Israel have agreed, AFAIK Israel haven't confirmed that.
There's little point in the UN agreeing upon a ceasefire agreement if the two parties to that ceasefire agreement haven't actually agreed on the ceasefire part for a start. Hamas said they want guarantees that it'll be a proper long-term ceasefire (e.g not just a pause), Netanyahu has said they'll pause but not stop until Hamas is gone.
A ceasefire would be good, that means both parties acting in good faith to negotiate a ceasefire and agreeing to it. Right now it doesn't sound to me like either is acting in good faith.