But I think this understates the effect that successful implementation of Phase 1, and Trump's recent bullying of Netanyahu, will have on Israel's policy going forward. The holding of the hostages gave Netanyahu a powerful casus belli to keep the country engaged in active fighting in Gaza for two years, and strengthened his domestic situation.

I would propose that the hostages were "Bibi's" one vulnerability. What were the public demonstrations by Israeli voters about? Where they feeling for Pals? No. Their primary concern has been for the hostages. Now "Bibi" is a hero for agreeing to a scheme to bring the hostages home.

As for the "pressure" from his nibs, he wanted a Nobel. I propose he put on a dog and pony show to wrap himself in the mantle of "peacemaker".

Consider the possibility that, the moment the hostages are safely back in Israel, some pretext is found to resume the war, because a big part of Bibi's base wants Gaza and the West Bank annexed. Trump didn't get the Nobel, so he won't care. And they will both blame the Pals.

Ever read "Decent Interval" by Frank Snepp? The title references a scenario that is backed up, to a degree, by Nixon administration documents.

Decent interval is a theory regarding the end of the Vietnam War which argues that from 1971 or 1972, the Nixon Administration abandoned the goal of preserving South Vietnam and instead aimed to save face by preserving a "decent interval" between withdrawal and South Vietnamese collapse. Therefore, President Richard Nixon could avoid becoming the first United States president to lose a war.

A variety of evidence from the Nixon tapes and from transcripts of meetings with foreign leaders is cited to support this theory, including Henry Kissinger's statement before the 1973 Paris Peace Accords that "our terms will eventually destroy him"[1] (referring to South Vietnamese president Nguyễn Văn Thiệu). However, both Kissinger and Nixon denied that such a strategy existed.

en.wikipedia.org - Decent interval

Steve...cynics R us