What are you basing that assumption on?

Too many factors to count. If you really want to get into a discussion about why Hamas benefits from a ceasefire more than Israel, we can - but I would prefer to keep this conversation on the issue of the negotiations as a whole.

If nothing else - the fact that Hamas has been trying to get a ceasefire deal out of the hostages and signalled a conditional willingness to accept a temporary ceasefire (though not on terms Israel finds acceptable) suggests very strongly that Hamas sees a ceasefire as beneficial to them.

Yeah it is. It’s basically the equivalent of being broke and jobless and selling your house for $5000. Sure, you can pay rent for a while with the $5000, but it’s much less than the house is worth and when the money’s spent, you’re homeless AND just as penniless as you started out.

Only instead of a house, it’s tens if not hundreds of thousands in civilian lives.

Okay. So you don't sell the house. The house is foreclosed on. You get nothing.

What is the benefit?

I wouldn’t on that persisting, though, as public opinion both domestically and internationally is increasingly worsening for the Israeli government as sympathy for their victims grow and outrage at the many atrocities spreads.

Take a look at the Israeli government. Not the concept of Israel as a rational (if amoral) world actor. Take a look at who is making the decisions right now, and how their grip on power is still firm both by legal means (the Knesset, short of snap elections, will not be replaced anytime soon) and by manipulation of Israeli popular opinion (the majority of Israelis still overwhelmingly get their news from Israeli sources, which have engaged in a monstrous amount of self-censorship regarding the genocide in Gaza after Oct 7).

With that in mind, what, in the next few months, do you expect public opinion in foreign countries to do to shift those decision-makers? Realistically speaking?

Nope. The Israeli government won’t stop at that.

You misunderstand. When I say "Wind up", I don't mean "The genocide stops". I mean "The genocide rapidly reaches completion." Once Rafah is taken, Israeli occupation of the Gaza strip is total once more, and they've already got massive 'humanitarian' camps to use as an excuse to starve and deport Palestinians.

Because the article and headline are muddling the waters after Israel has already (almost immediately) rejected the deal. Gaslighting isn’t always about tone.

Israel hasn't formally rejected the terms yet. It could very well just be posturing, especially since Israel sent negotiators back to Egypt after the announcement of Hamas's acceptance of the new deal. I think more likely it's stalling for time, but it's far from certain.