Israel were equally delayed in releasing their prisoners as well. And skirmishes happens on both sides of the table. And despite all that, the terms of the ceas

Israel were equally delayed in releasing their prisoners as well. And skirmishes happens on both sides of the table. And despite all that, the terms of the ceasefire—at least as related to the hostages—were met, and thensom, on both sides, and despite all this, they still extended the ceasefire a couple of times. Meaning that neither the delays, nor the skirmishes were the reason they failed to extend it the third time. Nowhere in your sources does it say Hamas nor Israel failed to deliver on promise, only that it was taking slower then expected. Your BBC article even cites the reason given by Hamas was slowness in delivering aid (we now know this is true). In fact all of your sources were published prior to the failure to extend the truce, which happened on December 1st. So I still don’t see where you read that the reason for the failure to extend were non-delivering on promises by Hamas. The truth is, it may very well be the fault of Hamas that the deal wasn’t extended. But we will not know that until Qatar releases documents which explains what really took place at the negotiating table on December 1st. Until then we are just speculating, and given what we know, it is equally likely that both parties are equally to blame.