A fragile pause, a political gamble: what the new Gaza ceasefire really means
Israel’s cabinet has approved a deal that, if implemented, would halt fighting in Gaza within 24 hours and set in motion the release of hostages held by Hamas over the last two years. For U.S. President Donald Trump, who helped shepherd the talks, it is a diplomatic trophy he says he will celebrate in person. For families who have spent nights in Hostages Square and displaced Palestinians sheltering under tarpaulin, it is a moment of raw, complicated relief.
- Advertisement -
What the deal does — and what it leaves unanswered
The initial phase calls for a ceasefire, a partial Israeli withdrawal and the freeing of hostages within about three days after the truce begins. In return, Hamas is to hand over captives and Israel will release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. Humanitarian corridors would open, with aid convoys and medical shipments allowed into Gaza — something the United Nations says has been desperately needed.
Yet the agreement is short on crucial detail. Who will govern Gaza after the guns fall silent? How long will Israeli forces remain near key points inside the territory? Will Hamas be required to disarm? Those questions — and the mechanics of reconstruction, security guarantees and accountability for wartime crimes — remain largely unresolved.
Jubilation beside grief
Celebrations broke out in both Gaza and Israel when word of the deal spread. In Khan Younis, people applauded in the streets despite the omnipresent smell of smoke. “Thank God for the ceasefire, the end of bloodshed and killing,” said Abdul Majeed Abd Rabbo, a resident whose voice summed up what many in Gaza felt after years of siege and relentless bombardment.
In Tel Aviv’s Hostages Square, families who have camped there since October 7, 2023, clutched one another and wept. Einav Zaugauker, whose son Matan is among the remaining captives, said: “I can’t breathe… It’s overwhelming — this is the relief.” These human scenes highlight the emotional heft of the deal even as logistical and political hurdles loom.
Trump’s role — broker or showman?
Mr. Trump, who outlined a 20-point framework that formed the deal’s backbone, announced he expected to be in the region to mark the first phase and attend a signing in Egypt. “The hostages will be coming back Monday or Tuesday. I’ll probably be there,” he told reporters, casting himself as the arbiter of a major Middle East moment.
That centrality is part of a broader trend: high-profile leaders, often with personal brand power, stepping into mediation roles in a world where traditional multilateral institutions are sometimes sidelined. The plan calls for an international body — reportedly to include figures such as former British prime minister Tony Blair — to help manage Gaza’s post-war future. Whether a personality-driven structure can deliver sustainable governance and legitimacy is a serious open question.
Politics at home and abroad
The ceasefire’s domestic reception in Israel is fractured. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hailed the deal as a “national and moral victory,” but hard-right coalition members bristled. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Hamas must be destroyed and refused to back the truce, signaling possible fractures in a government already riven by ideological tensions.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas called the moment “historic” and expressed hope for lasting calm. Yet Palestinians across the political spectrum remain skeptical about how power in Gaza will be shared or constrained, and whether promises of reconstruction will materialize without strings that further erode Palestinian sovereignty.
Humanitarian realities and legal questions
The United Nations warned that real progress requires more than “silencing of the guns.” Secretary-General António Guterres stressed the need for “full, safe and sustained access for humanitarian workers,” and the UN has prepositioned roughly 170,000 tons of supplies ready to enter Gaza. That aid will test whether the ceasefire can translate into lifesaving deliveries and reconstruction efforts rather than a temporary lull punctuated by resumed hostilities.
Internationally, Israel faces intense scrutiny. More than 67,000 Palestinians have been killed in the assault that followed Hamas’s October 7 offensive, which itself killed about 1,200 people in Israel and saw hundreds taken hostage. Rights groups and UN inquiries have accused the scale of the Gaza operation of breaching international law; Israel maintains it was acting in self-defence. The new deal does not erase those accusations — nor the demand for accountability — and any long-term settlement will have to reckon with them.
Can a pause become a pathway to peace?
This truce is best understood as a fragile window of opportunity rather than a finished peace. It offers a limited, necessary respite for civilians exhausted by war, and it gives room for aid to flow and for diplomatic architecture to be built. But the ingredients of durable stability — political inclusion, security guarantees that satisfy both Israelis and Palestinians, transparent reconstruction plans, and a credible route toward Palestinian self-determination — remain missing.
Will donors cough up the billions needed to rebuild a place where entire neighborhoods were razed? Can parties agree on who will police borders, run ports and control arms? And perhaps most importantly: can the international community reconcile short-term humanitarian relief with long-term justice and political rights?
Answers to those questions will determine whether this ceasefire marks the beginning of an uneasy truce or the fragile first steps toward a different — and far tougher — kind of diplomacy.
By Abdiwahab Ahmed
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.
