Hamas, the Palestinian militant movement, has stated that talks about the fate of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers will wait until Israel halts its assaults in Gaza. The declaration came on Lebanese television, where Osama Hamdan, the group’s official spokesperson, outlined the position. He indicated that the discussion of prisoners is contingent on a reduction of violence by Israel in Gaza and that any exchange would be approached only after combat operations pause. [Source: Reuters]
Hamdan stressed a clear stance: the issue of Israeli captives is linked to the broader conflict dynamics in Gaza. He suggested that diplomatic negotiations or prisoner swap talk would be possible once there is a cessation of Israeli aggression, framing the hostage question as inseparable from the wider conditions on the ground. The remarks were reported as part of ongoing media coverage of the conflict, with Reuters serving as one of the outlets capturing the exchange.
Current estimates indicate that around 203 individuals, many of them foreign nationals, are held by Hamas. A representative from the group’s armed wing, sometimes identified in media as Abu Ubaidah, indicated that the total number of hostages remains within a rough range of two to three hundred, acknowledging that approximately 200 to 250 people are claimed by supporters of Hamas. It was also noted that at least one hostage holds Russian citizenship. The precise counts and identities of hostages have varied across sources, reflecting the fluid and chaotic nature of the situation. [Source: Various briefings]
Several countries have signaled willingness to participate in mediating hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas. In this context, non-governmental actors and state representatives have discussed potential roles for third-party mediators, though some entities, including members of the European Union, indicated reluctance to take on an active intermediary function. The fragmentation of international approaches underscores the complexity of achieving a negotiated outcome amid ongoing hostilities and competing political objectives.
Meanwhile, in another strand of the broader crisis, there were updates on the attribution of responsibility for the Hamas attack. Some reports mentioned that there is no public evidence linking Iran to the operational planning of the assault, a claim that has been reiterated by security officials and various governments seeking to map the network of support and influence around Hamas. Analysts emphasize that while Iran has historically provided political and material backing to allied groups in the region, proving direct involvement in specific operations remains a challenging task requiring careful intelligence verification and corroboration from multiple sources. [Source: Security briefings]