For two weeks now, our hearts have been pounding, and the emotional roller-coaster has been non-stop, as more hostages are released as a part of the first stage of the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.
So far, the released hostages have not only been alive, but have seemed to be in relatively good condition, walking on their own, and displaying strength.
Sadly, we know that this will not be the case each week, with Israel stating that eight of the hostages slated for release in the first phase are no longer alive.
It is also heartwarming to witness scenes of Palestinians in Gaza returning to their homes and reuniting with their family and loved ones. At the same time, a sense of despair is unavoidable, with so much of the strip left in ruins, so many people still missing and/or presumed dead, and so many of those homes and other infrastructure no longer standing.
As with so much that happens in this region, the circumstances that led to this deal were unexpected by many, which in turn has caused many to apply their own narrative to why this deal was finally successful, after over a year of unsuccessful attempts to reach one.
And, as with so much that happens when we operate from a place of bias and preference rather than a clear-eyed analysis of the situation, the narratives are wrong.
On the political right, many see Trump's influence as the pressure needed on Hamas to finally concede to a deal and conversely, the tools given to Israel to finally act unrestrained in Gaza.
Both of these assumptions are entirely fabricated - the broad terms of the deal remained unchanged since May 2024, and, while the Biden administration sometimes had harsh words for Netanyahu and his government, there were no actual actions that restrained Israel, nor did Israel operate any differently in the brief period between the US election and the signing of a deal just before Trump's inauguration.
On the political left, many argue that Trump's pressure on Israel wasn't exercised by the previous administration, but the only pressure that Trump applied was in the form of words. The pressure the political left has advocated for has been the withholding of weapons to Israel, which never happened, and has not yet happened.
It's impossible to know if Trump said anything that Biden didn't. Trump most likely said the same things as Biden, but because Israel's right wing sees Trump and the Republicans as better friends to (Greater) Israel, they were simply more willing to oblige (while perhaps also gambling that concessions in the form of the US turning a blind eye to West Bank annexation are yet to come).
The crux of the problem with these incomplete or biased narratives is that they distract from what is actually important at this moment - completing all three phases of this deal, seeing the release of all the hostages, a permanent end to this war, and steps toward peace.
When we stay entrenched in our positions, even when proven wrong, we risk something larger than the temporary bruising of our own egos - we risk squandering future opportunities because we are unable to see the paths that have been opened up to us.
The grotesque displays orchestrated by Hamas with each hostage release are a direct result of Hamas retaining power in the strip because there was never an Israeli strategy to transfer power to another governing body. And, as many security and military experts warned, military pressure alone would never completely eliminate Hamas, despite this being a core goal of the war.
For those most hawkish commentators who are eager to resume fighting after this first phase, the question must be asked -- if over a year of fighting has left Hamas at least somewhat intact and led to the release of very few hostages, and the only actions that have moved the dial substantially have been diplomacy and negotiations, why would the continuation of a previously-failed strategy suddenly succeed?
Further, once we recognize that it is diplomacy and negotiations that put an end to this particular war between Hamas and Israel, should we not also recognize that it is diplomacy and negotiations that will put an end to the very conflict itself?
For those who called merely for this nightmare to end, without endorsing any concrete path toward the end, and for those who remain silent about the remaining two phases, and the need to continue to implement them for this to end, the path forward is now clear.
We will continue to unequivocally support diplomacy and negotiations over never-ending wars and bloodshed. We will continue to value life over death, and peace over war.
That doesn't mean that negotiations aren't painful and concessions don't create security concerns. It simply means that it is better to have the pains of peace over the agonies of war.
The past two weeks have shown us that, and it would behoove us all to admit it - even if it runs counter to our prior preferred narrative.