president biden and israeli prime minister bibi netanyahu major making news from the middle east. hamas has accepted a cease-fire proposal from egypt and qatar. nbc's raf sanchez is following this for us. nbc's aaron gilchrist is reporting from the white house. raf, give us the outline of this. what do we know about this potential deal? >> reporter: chris, in just the last couple minutes hamas released a statement from the leader of its political wing, ismaih haniyeh who says they've agreed to a cease-fire proposal by qatar and egypt, a prossal that's been on the table for more than a week, a proposal that the u.s. has been urging hamas to take. our understanding of the most recent iteration of this

proposal is that hamas would agree to the release of 33 hostages from the so-called humanitarian category. so that is women, it is children, it is the elderly, people with serious medical conditions. and in return, israel would agree to a 40-day cease-fire and the release of potentially thousands of palestinian prisoners. we should stress at this point all we have is this statement from the political wing of hamas. we do not have the detail of what exactly it is that they have agreed to, and there has been pretty frenetic diplomacy over the weekend involving cia director bill burns who started in egypt, flying to qatar, coming here to israel. it is possible that the framework of that deal has changed over the weekend. it is also worth saying that these deals are often structured in terms of first an agreement

on a broad framework and then hammering out of the details. as you know, chris, the devil is often in the detail, but there is positive indication for the first time since that last cease-fire deal which lasted only a week, collapsed on december 1st last year. this is the first time we have heard from hamas that they are prepared to accept a cease-fire proposal. we have heard nothing officially from the israeli government. israel is certainly aware of this statement from hamas. they are studying it. we have not heard yet from prime minister netanyahu or israeli officials. fwhu is a potentially positive sign after these many, many months of bloodshed in gaza and these many, many painful months of the hostages staying in hams

captivity. >> so without anything, raf, from israeli officials, no way to know how this might impact the assault that we are expecting in rafah where about 1.4 million civilians remain? >> early this morning palestinian residents in the east of rafah found themselves with a snowfall of leaflets falling from israeli aircraft with a pretty stark message saying get out of this area, israel's military plans to attack. in that area, around 100,000 palestinian civilians sheltering inside of it. that's according to the idf. they were told to flee to

so-called humanitarian zones on the mediterranean coast of gaza. at this point no israeli forces have moved in to begin that offensive. it's not clear, chris, whether this is the large-scale attack that prime minister netanyahu has been threatening for months now, aimed he says at destroying the four hamas battalions hiding in the city or if this is a more limited operation in response to hamas firing rockets yesterday which killed four israeli soldiers around kerem shalom. this has caused widespread alarm inside. packing up their tents, fleeing on foot in sometimes donkey-drawn carriages. chris, it is also possible that the movement we saw today was an israeli negotiating tactic designed to put pressure not just on hamas, but also on

egypt, also on the united states to get an agreement through. we don't know yet what the relationship is between this hamas statement and this israeli escalating inside of rafah. it is notable that hamas saying it has agreed to this deal just a few hours after those leaflets were dropped and very shortly after that phone called wrap up between president biden and prime minister netanyahu. chris. >> so i want to make sure i understand because so much of the concern over the last many months has surrounded the hostages. the latest number i see, raf, is that there is 132 hostages, by that i think we can say people who were taken hostage and still missing. some of them presumed dead. as many as five u.s. citizens. of these, apparently 33 would be released under this deal? >> reporter: yeah, chris, that's right. so israel's official numbers,

132 hostages being held inside gaza. that number actually lowered from 133 last week when it turned out a young man who was thought to be held hostage in gaza was actually killed on october 7th. his body found inside of israel. so 132 hostages in total. officially around 35 or so of them are known to be dead according to the israeli government. israel suspects that the real number is potentially significantly higher than that, and that number of hostages includes civilians. it includes soldiers. so this humanitarian category would be focused on women, would be focused on children, be focused on the elderly and people with serious medical conditions. now, there are five american hostages who are thought to be alive in hamas captivity right now. we have seen hostage videos, two

of them over the last couple weeks. hirsh goldberg poland, the young man kidnapped from the music festival, his left arm blown off by a hamas grenade while he was sheltering in a bomb shelter on the side of the road and also keith segall, 64 years old, born in north carolina, living in along the gaza border. he's the oldest known american hostage still alive in hamas activity. it's not clear, chris, whether hirsh goldberg poland because of his serious injuries, keith segall, because of his age, would be included in that humanitarian category or not. we think the priority would likely be the women. there are two young children, the beavis brothers who are unaccounted for inside gaza.

hamas has claimed at certain points that those children are dead. israel has never officially confirmed that. the priority would be getting the women and the children out first. so this is certainly a moment of hope for the families of israeli hostages who have waited so long. we should stress this statement is from the political wing of hamas. we have not yet heard anything from yahya sinwar, the man believed to be the ultimate decision maker in this situation. he is thought to be in the tunnels underneath southern gaza right now. chris, you can bet with their

limited internet there are people in rafah right now, potentially people fleeing from their homes at this very moment who are hoping that this is the breakthrough they have been praying for, also, and for the first time since december 1st, that there might be a pause in the fighting. the hostages might be coming out and more humanitarian aid might be coming in. chris. >> we are watching pictures from earlier in rafah with children loaded onto a cart who seem to be evacuating that city. let me go to aaron gilchrist now. aaron, in spite of the fact that this has been a very intense and difficult relationship between bibi netanyahu and president biden, the u.s. has been very actively involved, obviously, in diplomatic efforts to try to come to a cease-fire. what are you hearing from the white house right now? >> reporter: chris, you're right. deeply involved in the process right from the very beginning, with the first set of

negotiations that went on to achieve that first cease-fire and hostage release. we know cia director bill burns was deeply involved in the process back then and he has been deeply involved in the process up until this point, actually spending this past weekend in the middle east. as we understand it from our reporting in dohar qatar as part of the last round of negotiations that, in fact, if what we heard today from hamas is true, director burns would likely have been involved in that process of bringing this to the finish line if you will. this is something that the biden administration has said it's been working toward day in and day out since the last cease-fire fell apart, as raf noted, back in december of last year. so today we have not yet gotten a response or a confirmation from the white house. forgive me for looking down, just to make sure that hasn't come down while we've been

talking. we have not gotten that today. but we do know there were indications that this deal was something that could happen. the secretary of state, tony blinken was in the middle east last week and said on more than one occasion hamas needed to take this deal, it was an extremely gracious deal they had put on the table for hamas and something he was pushing for. we heard over the weekend the same admonition that hamas accept this deal that was on the table. at this point after the president having spoken to the israeli prime minister this morning before he left wilmington to return to washington, we got the readout from that phone call a little while ago. the indication was the president was updating prime minister netanyahu on the negotiation to come to a deal here and that the negotiations were actively happening as the president was speaking to the prime minister. that's the indication we got from that readout, and the president again making clear to the prime minister according to this readout his position on

raffa had not changed in that the administration said to the israelis they did not want to see a large-scale military action in raffa until there was a concrete plan to care for the 1-million-plus civilians in that area right now, not wanting to see anymore civilian death and the people in rafah, the palestinians there were already suffering so much. so this news that a deal has been agreed to by hamas, one can imagine is something that the administration is looking at as a positive indication and something that the administration has indicated they think this deal, a deal coming together at this point would be something that would allow for more talks to happen with the palestinians -- with hamas i should say, with the palestinian authority. the israelis and all the other players in the middle east to try to come to a larger understanding about a two-state solution as the biden

administration has said where the fighting ends and they're able to create a situation where palestinians and israelis could live together -- rather side-by-side in two separate states but peacefully in that region. i want to bring in general barry mccaffrey. it's always great to see you. to reiterate what we heard from raf sanchez, this is a positive first sign, not a done deal, but very far along from where we had been. if there's a big asterisk, it may be that the leader of hamas, the key decision maker, sinwar, we have not heard from him yet. how would you describe this? would you say cautiously optimistic based on what we know so far? >> well, clearly it's good news. the next step from the israeli point of view was go into rafah and get in the underground tunnels after the remaining

hamas leadership. in addition, four hamas fighting battalions that are intact. that threat of military invasion is the only thing that would bring hamas to the table. i think the israelis have one strategic purpose, is how do they end up with gaza not governed by hamas. there's really nothing in this that indicates there would be any other authority, the palestinian authority and international arab league that would take over gov vance. i think the situation in the longer run is unchanged, bitter and threatening. >> let me also bring in admiral james stavridis. it's been less than a half hour since we first got this reporting. what are you going to be watching for in the coming hours? >> three things. number one, obviously, the situation in rafah.

will the israelis continue to ask the civilian population to evacuate? i think they will. i think as this unfolds, it will be instructive to watch how successful that is over time. number two, i'll be watching for the provision of humanitarian aid, a big part of the criticism that's been directed in israel, in this case appropriately, is on the lack of humanitarian aid coming in. hopefully some additional good news we might get in the next day or two is that the pira complex instructed by the u.s. military, army, navy, marine, s.e.a.l.s guarding it, will open. that could bring 100 to 150 truckloads of aid a day, sufficient for minimal survival for much of the population. i'll be watching humanitarian

aid and how that unfolds. third, and i think quite importantly, watch the tunnel complex. i felt for a long time the real military center of gravity here is actually not hamas. you'll never kill all those fighters. more are being generated every day. but if the israelis can decommission those tunnels, chris, by flooding them, exploding them, sealing them off, that would take away the means by which hamas has been able to train, organize, equip, direct these operations. i'm going to be watching the tunnel complex, the humanitarian aid and the movement of civilians out of rafah. those are three key indicators for me. >> i'm getting new information. i want to make sure that we're very clear about this, that this is just a single source. it comes from reuters. we have not confirmed this. but an israeli official says

hamas approved a softened egyptian proposal that is not acceptable to israel. let me go back to you, raf sanchez. you pointed this out i think earlier on. we have to be careful about the details. the devil is always in the details. again, israeli officials says hamas approved a softened egyptian proposal not acceptable to israel. do we have any clue what would be unacceptable to israel? >> chris, the big, big sticking points throughout these negotiations has been whether this is a deal for a pause in the fighting, which is what israel wants or a deal to end the war altogether which is what hamas wants. trying to bridge that gap which frankly seems like a zero-sum situation, has been one of these very, very tricky maneuvers that the mediators have been trying to pull off. so there has been talk over the

last week, is there something that hamas could be given, some kind of assurance, that this initial cease-fire of 40 days would segue into something longer, something more sustained, something more permanent. negotiators have been trying to find creative ways to bridge the gap. as you said, we do not have this confirmed. i could imagine that one of the potential pitfalls here might be that there is language about a potential end to the war in whatever agreement it is that hamas says it has approved of that is not acceptable to the israeli government. we should say, chris, that a lot of the hostage families have been deeply, deeply worried that prime minister benjamin netanyahu does not want an agreement. the prime minister has said repeatedly on the record that one of his top priorities is getting the hostages out of gaza, but there's a lot of

concern among the hostage families that his actual priority has been prosecuting the war against hamas, destroying them militarily rather than leaving the diplomatic space for the hostages. there's also been concern among the families that it may be in netanyahu's own political interests to continue the war, that he might be facing elections when the war ends. his polling right now is dire. so that has been a concern among the hostage families, that netanyahu might be unwilling to accept a deal. it is worth saying -- secretary of state blinken has said israel has made serious conceptions in pursuit of an agreement. he has described the offer that israel has put forward as generous. we know from israeli officials they went from looking for 40 hostages from the humanitarian

category down to 33 after hamas indicated it might not have 40 living hostages that fit that criteria. we know, also, israel has made concessions on allowing palestinian civilians to go from the south back to their homes in the north where they were displaced from. but as we've said, chris, over and over again, the details here are fiendishly complicated. we want to hear from the israeli government that the proposal hamas has agreed to is also a proposal that israel can agree to. that previous cease-fire which was agreed back in november, as i said, it was approved three stages, the israeli war cabinet, the israeli security cabinet and then the full israeli cabinet. that has not happened so far. at this point we don't have anything official from the israeli government in response to this statement from hamas. chris? >> i want to bring in nbc's

andrea mitchell. in addition, andrea, to not having anything official from the israeli government -- and you just heard raf talk about the visit by secretary of state blinken, and you were on that trip. you know on the other side of this, in addition to the fact that there is a statement from the political wing of hamas saying they have accepted whatever this deal is, we don't know the details. there are so many hamas factions. so the fiendish details are not just about israel. they're also obviously about hamas and who speaks for hamas. >> and that is so critical, chris. you're absolutely right. as raf well knows, yahya sinwar is the most militant military wing of hamas. he's believed to be underground in one of the tunnels. he's agreed to be the mastermind of october 7th, not haniyen, whose name is signed to the agreement of the cease-fire proposal.

some reporting that it's been watered down to what was originally offered. we don't know the exact outlines of it yet. one of the things that over the weekend hamas was saying, it had to be a permanent cease-fire. israel was only agreeing to 40 days, 33 hostages and potentially thousands of palestinian prisoners. more details to be worked out as to which palestinian prisoners. the key thing is prime minister netanyahu and the war cabinet, they were going into rafah, they started to send leaflets to people in raffa, 1.4 million people, more than a million of whom already displaced from elsewhere, that they had to move. this was not acceptable to the u.s. there was a call today between president biden and the prime minister, and clearly from the readouts we've gotten, the president reiterated his position about rafah, the u.s. doesn't want them going into rafah, they didn't believe the

plan for relocating those people was adequate, nor the military plan. there had been efforts made between the pentagon, the u.s. and gallant about tailoring any move to rafah that would not be as threatening to civilians. i'm getting an announcement from the defense minister, gallant's spokeswoman, that there was a conversation overnight or early this morning between the defense minister in israel and defense secretary lloyd austin, and they did talk about the overnight rocketing from hamas that killed four soldiers. we're waiting to hear more about that, and that this was rocketing into kerem shalom where we wered wednesday afternoon and evening. this is a principle aid crossing, the second one opened from israel into gaza, sort of

parallel to rafah. a third was just opening this week while secretary blinken was just there, into northern gaza, aid going from jordan, trucked across israel into north gaza where the hunger and approaching famine is described as catastrophic, certainly by cindy mccain this weekend on "meet the press," in charge of the world food program. there's so many different pieces to this. as far as we know, there's a tentative agreement announced by haniyeh, not by sinwar. as of yesterday they were not agreeing to what israel had offered. whether israel really did intend to go into rafah despite the objections from the u.s. or was just making these steps, taking those steps, telling people to evacuate as pressure tactics on

hamas remains to be seen. i can tell you this. from talking to arab leaders all gathered in saudi arabia when we were there and then in jordan and then moving on to israel, the arab world believed, as the u.s. believed, that this was really the last chance. our cia director was there. he went in on thursday to doha and feeling there was some possibility that something was on the table from israel that was praised repeatedly by secretary blinker last week when we were with him, saying it was a generous offer, and it was up to hamas to accept it. hams hadn't accepted it until today when haniyeh said it was accepted. at the same time israel was taking very ag aggressive measures, shutting down al jazeera, which was very offensive to people in the region, people in the arab world as well as certainly the hosts for al jazeera which was founded in qatar which is negotiating

the cease-fire agreement. shutting down al jazeera was a very aggressive step yesterday by the israeli cabinet. and the criticism, of course, has been from the u.s. and others, that benjamin netanyahu is trying to placate the two ultra conservative members of his cabinet who have the police and national security asks, their ministries, and at the same time trying to save his own dog by not having his government fall apart without their membership. >> general mccaffrey, andrea touched on so many things and i want to kind of bring them together if i can. she talked about the interview with cindy mccain which was very blunt about the catastrophic situation on the ground. many aid workers who have been on the ground have suggested in recent days and certainly in recent weeks that we're working at a full-fledged famine. very influential columnist in "the new york times," nick kristof, dedicated part of his

column to a photograph of a k450i8d in a hospital bed with his mother holding him who reportedly starved to death. then you have pressure from hostage families who have been living all this time without knowledge of what condition their family members are in or even if they're alive. when you balance that against the pressure from ultra conservative members of his cabinet as well as his own political peril for benjamin netanyahu, where does that leave us? >> well, who knows? at the end of the day, israel is in a treacherous, perilous situation. the shorthand for a pause in the fighting versus a permanent cease-fire is the israelis acknowledging which i think will be the outcome, that hamas will return to governance of gaza, something widely opposed among

the israeli population because it says there will be another 7 october at some time in the future. in addition we should understand the israelis have massive humanitarian losses themselves, 80,000 some odd people in the north confronted by constant fire from hezbollah are evacuated from that part of israel. all along the border with gaza, those communities have not returned. finally, the real key to getting the hostages all back was to put at peril the senior leadership of hamas which is people widely understand is either out of the country or underground in tunnels in the rafah area. i think netanyahu's intent was to place their lives at peril and try and get back all the hostages. if they get back 33, they'll

never get back the remainder, the remainder that may still well be alive. i think the israelis have lost the information war. they have destroyed a good bit of gaza, probably 70-some-odd percent of structures have been damaged or destroyed. they have killed a lot of civilians. there were 30,000 hamas fighters we said. they probably killed 8 to 12,000 of them. but hamas is likely to emerge from all this in control of a destroyed gaza that they deliberately brought upon themselves. they understood the israelis could not tolerate 7 october and would have to go back into a densely packed urban area with 2.4 million civilians living in it with a catastrophic result that we've seen. israel is not in a very good situation in my view at this

point. >> so admiral stavridis, i want to go back to something you and i talked about in the earlier days of this, following october 7 when i think 1200 israelis and foreigners were killed in the worst attack on israel since its founding in 1948, and that is the pledge by benjamin netanyahu that he wanted to make sure there would never be another october 7th. as the general just rightly pointed out, for so many israelis, that is the ultimate goal here. and yet, to go back to those early conversations, is that possible, at least in terms of getting rid of hamas, making sure hamas is dismantled forever? >> i don't think it's ever possible to completely dismantle terrorist organizations. we've seen that again and again and again as we've gone after al qaeda and boko haram and more recently islamic state.

what you can do is take away their means of attack. you can degrade them and reduce them. i think the operations here are designed to do so. as i mentioned a moment ago, chris, decommissioning this complex web of 400 miles of tunnels underneath gaza, which is only 25 miles by 5 miles, 400 miles of tunnels, that's got to be job one here. job two alongside it is to continue to execute a plan that permits taking care of the civilians but even as you are conducting the war fighting that general mccaffrey spoke about just a moment ago, that is going to continue once the cease-fire is over. raf correctly pointed out, we don't know what is in this agreement yet that israel might disagree with. he pointed to the idea that

israel would want only a pause. hamas would want a path at least to a complete cease-fire. the other thing we don't know is governance. will israel keep forces inside gaza? that's been a significant sticking point. i think over time you're going to see the israelis want some presence in gaza, but they will probably go after some combination of arab league peacekeepers, maybe some u.n. peacekeepers, sprinkle palestinian authority over that. they'll want to continue to be deeply involved. all of that is in the to-be-determined category. spinal thought, back where we started a moment ago, it's the civilians who are desperately in need who will most benefit from even a temporary cease-fire. for that reason, we all ought to be hoping and cheering if we get even a 40-day pause in the

fighting. it's important. >> we have gotten a statement from liz naftali, the aunt of abigail eden. she was held hostage and released. she met with president biden and there's a picture of him holding her. in spite of the fact that hamas accepted the cease-fire proposal, andrea mitchell, admiral stavridis, thank you. we'll be right back. avridis, thu we'll be right back. to glass da, but he was busy working from home... ...so he scheduled with safelite in just a few clicks. we came to his house... then we got to work. we replaced his windshield... ...and installed new wipers to protect his new glass. >> customer: looks great. thank you. >> tech: my pleasure. >> vo: we come to you for free. schedule now for free mobile service at safelite.com. ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ (bell ringing) someone needs to customize and save hundreds with liberty mutual!

(inaudible sounds) (elevator doors opening) wait, there's an elevator? only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, ♪ ♪ liberty. ♪ deep down, i knew something was wrong. since my fatigue and light-headedness would come and go, i figured it wasn't a big deal. then i saw my doctor and found out i have afib, and that means there's about a 5 times greater risk of stroke. symptoms like irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain,

shortness of breath, fatigue, or light- headedness can come and go. but if you have afib, the risk of stroke is always there. if you have one or more symptoms, get checked out. holding off on seeing a doctor won't change whether or not you have afib. but if you do, making that appointment can help you get ahead of stroke risk. contact a doctor and learn more at notimetowait.com ♪ that colonoscopy for getting screened ♪ ♪ is why i'm delaying ♪ ♪ i heard i had a choice ♪ ♪ i know the name, that's what i'm saying ♪ -cologuard®? -cologuard. cologuard! -screen for colon cancer. -at home, like you want. -you the man! -actually, he's a box. cologuard is a one-of-a-kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45+ at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪ i did it my way ♪ (ella) fashion moves fast. ask your provider for cologuard. setting trends is our business.

we need to scale with customer demand... in real time. (jen) so we partner with verizon. their solution for us? a private 5g network. (ella) we now get more control of production, efficiencies, and greater agility. (marquis) with a custom private 5g network. our customers get what they want, when they want it. (jen) now we're even smarter and ready for what's next. (vo) achieve enterprise intelligence. it's your vision, it's your verizon. i don't want you to move. i'm gonna miss you so much.

you realize we'll have internet waiting for us at the new place, right? oh, we know. we just like making a scene. transferring your services has never been easier. get connected on the day of your move with the xfinity app. can i sleep over at your new place? can katie sleep over tonight? sure, honey! this generation is so dramatic! move with xfinity.

news that hamas has accepted a cease-fire proposal from egypt and qatar. we have new nbc report that the white house halted a large shipment of weapons to israel just last week. that's according to two senior administration officials familiar with the decision. i want to bring in nbc's courtney kube and ben rhodes, former national security deputy advisor to president obama. general barry mccaffrey is still with us. courtney, give us the details. >> this includes a large shipment of offensive weapons that were to go to israel and were halted by the white house. this includes 2,000-pound bombs, things that likely would be used in some sort of an offensive in rafah. chris, the reason this is significant, this is the first time that we are aware of that the white house stopped a

shipment of offensive weapons to israel since october 7th for any reason other than a logistical hangup. officials are telling us, they're stressing this is not a larger policy change, but it's still significant nonetheless. this includes, as i said, offensive weapons, not defensive weapons. israel has a pretty big arsenal already. it's not like one shipment is going to stop them from moving forward with this ground offensive in raffa, but these are the sorts of things that could be helpful as a part of that, chris. >> so if i can, general, as we know, it would be an understatement to say that the relationship, the conversations between president biden and prime minister netanyahu has been strained. they see this from very different perspectives. is this the white house speaking the language they think that benjamin netanyahu will understand? how do you read this? >> of course. although i might add a comment. i've almost been killed by enemy forces using defensive weapons

quite a few times. the distinction is sort of arcane. we've got to understand that biden's election is partially at stake. he's lost the youth population, some minority populations. there's a huge uproar going on on college campuses. he simply has to understand and address domestic politics. if he doesn't, we end up with a lawless trump next november. so we shouldn't be sympathetic, empathetic of what the president has to do politically. i think the other thing we've got to face up to is that there's really no possibility, the idf, israeli defense forces, achieving a victory over hamas. they've lost the information war in the international world. they have largely not been able to get the hamas senior leadership, many of whom are billionaires and out of the

conflict zone or they're in dense urban environment of rafah with a million refugees above them while they're in tunnels. so the idf cannot really achieve netanyahu's strategic purpose, which is to not allow hamas to again govern gaza. if they do, and i think they will, there will be another attempt of a 7 october in the coming years. this is a really tragic situation. gaza is a wreck. somebody is going to have to rebuild it for $50 billion over the next 20 years, and there's no real decent outcome. as we said in the earlier conversation, there's 80,000-plus israeli refugees up north from hezbollah fighting and another 60-some-odd along the gaza frontier. this is a tragedy and unlikely to have a good outcome at the end of the day.

>> the white house, as you know, ben, has continued to say repeatedly it does not want to see an israeli assault on rafah. is again this is the way they sort of punctuate that message? what do you make of the shipment be halted? >> well, i think that's right, chris. i think for a long time, months now, rafah has been looming as a potential definitive breaking point between the biden administration and netanyahu. what we've seen to date is rhetorical distance between president biden and prime minister netanyahu, but not manifesting in any shift in policy when it comes to the provision of weapons or voting at the u.n. security council, the key ways in which the united states expresses its support for israel's military campaign. i think given how much the administration has counseled against this offensive in rafah, it becomes almost untenable for them to continue to provide the

kinds of weapons that they have over the last six or seven months, as israel is ignoring president biden and going forward with that assault on rafah. i see this as a harbinger of potential further restrictions on offensive military systems that take general mccaffrey's point. you can define this in different ways. it can be very specific types of things that are restricted, like those 2,000-pound bombs. it can be individual shipments, or it can be more comprehensive and leave us in a situation where we're essentially providing the iron dome system, missile defense systems, but not the kinds of weapons that israel uses in gaza. i think that remains to be seen. it's just how far president biden turns the dial to essentially severing u.s. support for the military aspects of this offensive in rafah or the israeli military campaign in general. i think that's what we'll see if -- and we don't know because the cease-fire is so ambiguous

right now. but if the rafah engagement goes forward, i think you'll see a shift of sorts in the u.s. posture. the question is how far does that shift go, how clean a break is it in terms of providing military assistance? or is the u.s. continuing to try to persuade netanyahu? thus far he has ignored those efforts of persuasion. >> ben, to your point of the ambiguity that exists right now, i think it's useful just to remind people what happened over the last couple days. early in the weekend there were conflicting reports about how well these negotiations were going. then just yesterday a senior administration official said to us that that deal with hamas for a temporary cease-fire at least seemed hopeful, seemed more possible. we know cia director william burns is on the ground there after the secretary of state is there. we heard andrea reporting on that throughout last week. this morning we also know that president biden spoke with prime minister netanyahu in what was described as a hastily arranged

call. you know what it is to be in the middle of delicate and complex negotiations like this. given what we know right now, the apparent resistance. we don't have anything from israel, just a reuters report, that they don't think this is the deal they were looking for. what's going on behind the scenes right now? >> well, i think the administration very much wants to get this deal done as potentially the last chance to secure the release of hostages before a rafah operation goes forward. it's a puzzle with many different pieces. there's the hamas political leadership. then there's the hamas military leadership on the ground in gaza, sinwar. there's qatar. there's egypt. there's israel. netanyahu has different pieces. he's got his far right of his coalition that he'll want to support a deal. those people have made it clear they're not that interested in a deal. then he has pressure from hostage families. the question is can you assemble all those pieces to get some

hostages out, to get some calm for some period of time. frankly, i would think the administration would want to use that period of calm to try to build some more durable peace or some pathway to what the future of gaza looks like. i think the main sticking point we've been talking about and as raf effectively captured, is hamas' core goal is achieving a lasting cease-fire, permanent cease-fire, essentially an end to the war. israel has made clear that, even if there is a cease-fire for a period of time, they're not done until they go into rafah. the question of the rafah piece of the military operation i think really is the critical one. i'm sure what bill burns is trying to do and what negotiators are trying to do is try to find some way to reconcile seemingly irreconcilable positions. can they communicate to hamas that while it's not technically a permanent cease-fire, it's a long-term calm? send a lot of assistance in and crete space for diplomacy that

could lead to something more durable? or does israel essentially insist on the fact that they're going to be going forward with military operations in rafah. i think the administration might want israel to have that be far more targeted than the large-scale ground operations we've seen in other parts of the gaza strip. essentially, the question is can you bridge this gap about the future of rafah and the israeli military operation to get the hostages out in exchange for sol palestinian prisoners? we'll find out today, fran willingly. this is coming to a conclusion because israel has been taking strikes on rafah, warned over 100,000 people to evacuate. so we're racing the clock. the sand is running through the hour glass here. the question is can you get something done before rafah goes forward? >> i want to bring in nbc's richard engel who anybody who watches this network knows has extesive experience in the region and covering this story from the very beginning. what can you tell us at this

point, richard? >> reporter: so i can perhaps add some clarity to these conversations you were just having a short while ago. while you were talking i was in a discussion with one of the key negotiators, the arab negotiators directly involved in these talks. he explained to me that, yes, there is a discrepancy between israel's interpretation of the deal and the deal that hamas is now accepting, but that it goes back to the fact that the qataris, the egyptians, hamas, have been working for the last several days based on a proposal that was given to them by israel, a proposal that was endorsed by the united states, a proposal that secretary of state antony blinken called extremely generous, but that the israelis didn't show up to those negotiations. so effectively hamas made a deal

with itself, took the proposal, said we accept it and here it is. it's being used as a way to pressure the israelis to come back to the table. if you don't like the terms, then come and tell us what the terms are that you do like. our understanding is this deal that hamas is accepting is quite similar to the deal that israel was proposing, but some of the language is different. we don't know exactly what the language is. some of these documents are secret, some are verbal. the general understanding is it is a three-phase deal starting out with the release of 33 hostages in exchange for a 40 -- some say 42-day cease-fire that would be extended with more hostage releases after that. it also talked about, according to hamas' understanding, reconstruction, a long-term cease-fire, other terms that

hamas wants to include so that it seems like more of a lasting peace treaty instead of just a temporary cease-fire deal. but it apparently is not the exact document that israel has said it would agree to, but is being used as a way to get israel to come back to the negotiating table and physically present in the room putting pressure on netanyahu. as ben rhodes was saying earlier, netanyahu is under a lot of pressure from the right and negotiators felt, hamas felt that he was trying to escape the deal entirely to go ahead this morning with the rafah operation unilaterally. so hamas agreed to the deal. here it here it is, we're ready to go, and if you don't like it, come and talk to us. >> richard engel with late details after talking to a key arab negotiators. thank you very much. i want to go to the state

department now where spokesperson matt miller has been briefing. he just said that the u.s. is reviewing the hamas response and discussing it with parties in the region. >> reporter: hamas's political wing and militant wing, are they on the same page? do you feel like this is a response that indicates where the group is? >> i'm not going to speak for hamas at all. as we have said for some time, there's been a significant offer on the table. the ball has been in hamas's court. we have made clear they should accept that offer. israel made significant, and we have hoped that hamas would take the deal on the table. as to what's in their response, what it looks like, we're going to review that and withhold judgment until we've had a chance to conduct a full review. >> the israeli offensive in rafah, in the hours before this, reports to evacuations ever, but israel's talking about evacuations from rafah.

what's the u.s. message now? do you think they should hold off on the operations of rafah as we discuss this response? >> we have made clear our position on rafah for some time. we cannot support an operation in rafah as it is currently envisioned. the secretary made this clear in his conversations with prime minister netanyahu. and other members of the israeli government last week that we have not seen humanitarian plans that is credible and that is implementable, and we believe a military operation in rafah would dramatically increase the suffering of the palestinian people, would lead to an increase in loss of civilian life, would dramatically disrupt the delivery of humanitarian assistance, the great majority of which is coming through rafah and being distributed inside the rafah area. if you think about what it would do when you have people moving north to places where internal distribution lines are not currently set up, and you're going to have to try to reestablish those in the middle of conflict in rafah.

we think that would be difficult if not impossible to do. even about sent this latest response, we have made clear that we do not support israel launching a full scale operation in rafah. >> sure. you said that in terms of the u.s. position on this. >> i want to go back to raf sanchez because we have apparently now word from israeli officials. raf, what have you got for us? >> reporter: i just got off the phone with an israeli official, they are telling me the proposal hamas agreed to is not the frame work that is not the framework agreed upon by israel and the mediators, there are discrepancy between what israel believed the deal on the table was and what hamas is tonight saying it has agreed to. now, the israeli government is not saying that it is outright rejecting the version that hamas has signed up to. this official tells me that

hamas's response is now being studied at the highest levels of the israeli government, and that israel will respond to it. but critically, chris, what we do not have right now is an agreed upon text that both israel and hamas have signed on to. at this point, it seems there are at least two different texts. there is the framework that israel and the mediators agreed to, according to this israeli official, and then there is a somewhat alters version which is what hamas has responded to. so the israeli government, studying this response that has come from hamas, but what we do not yet have is a text that all sides have agreed to. at this point, chris, we have not heard anything official from prime minister benjamin netanyahu. we have heard a statement from the most far right member of his cabinet. that is national security

minister. ben-gvir, a man opposed to the last hostage deal saying he made too many concessions to hamas. he said in a tweet, hamas's games have one answer, an immediate order to occupy rafah, increasing military pressure and completing the defeat of hamas until its total defeat. again, chris, that is the most far right member of benjamin netanyahu's cabinet, saying these are games from hamas and that israel needs to do is press ahead with an attack on rafah. ben-gvir is not in the small circle of decision makers, but he does play a key political role. he's propping benjamin netanyahu's government up. he's in a position to exert pressure on the israeli prime minister. so his voice is worth paying attention to. chris, not far from where we are now in central tel aviv, the

families of israeli hostages are out protesting in front of the defense ministry, a place called hostage square that has become the beating heart of the hostage movement here in israel, and they are demanding that their government make a deal. they don't know all the details between these two texts, but they are saying eight months into the war that israel's government needs to make the hostages the absolute top priority, if that means delaying an offensive in rafah, so be it. some of them will tell you, if it means ending the war all together, leaving hamas in power in gaza, then so be it. there's a total consensus among the families, this is a large group of people, they are a range of views, they are united in their sense that the absolute top priority has to be getting the hostages out. chris. >> and just to put everything that we heard over the last five

minutes or so in context, it sounds as though, matt miller said that there was a significant offer on the table. what he called significant compromises by israel but based on the conversation that raf sanchez just had was an israeli official. the proposal that hamas has agreed to is not that proposal. it is something with discrepancy, and so as you have been saying since the beginning of this, the devil will be in the details, we will continue to foul it closely. raf sanchez, general barry mccaffrey, ben rhodes. thank you, we will stay on top of this. the hush money trial is set to resume about 20 minutes from now. we'll be right back on a very busy monday. on a very busy monday. in real time. (jen) so we partner with verizon. their solution for us? a private 5g network. (ella) we now get more control of production, efficiencies, and greater agility.

(marquis) with a custom private 5g network. our customers get what they want, when they want it. (jen) now we're even smarter and ready for what's next. (vo) achieve enterprise intelligence. it's your vision, it's your verizon. you know what's brilliant? boring. think about it. boring is the unsung catalyst for bold. what straps bold to a rocket and hurtles it into space? boring does. boring makes vacations happen, early retirements possible, and startups start up. because it's smart, dependable, and steady. all words you want from your bank. for nearly 160 years, pnc bank has been brilliantly boring so you can be happily fulfilled... which is pretty un-boring if you think about it. here's to getting better with age. here's to beating these two every thursday. help fuel today with boost high protein, complete nutrition you need... ...without the stuff you don't. so, here's to now. boost. (tony hawk) skating for over 45 years has taken a toll on my body.

i take qunol turmeric because it helpsnow. with healthy joints and inflammation support. why qunol? it has superior absorption compared to regular turmeric. qunol. the brand i trust. whoa! how'd you get your teeth so white? you gotta use the right toothpaste! dr. c?! ♪♪ not all toothpastes whiten the same. crest 3d white removes 100% more stains for a noticeably whiter smile. new personal best. crest. raising you was no bed of roses. are you getting me

anything for mother's day? go to 1-800-flowers.com. oh my gosh! wow! gorgeous! i feel like royalty. thank you. 1-800-flowers.com. happy mother's day. happy mother's day!