"soli omnium opes atque inopiam pari adfectu concupiscunt.
Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium, atque,
ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant"
Tacitus (Agricola)
Gideon's Chariots - Peace??
Hamas has not agreed to disarm. There were reports that they may agree to give up power in exchange for amnesty, but that has not been confirmed. Israel had not succeeded in its stated aim of destroying Hamas. The very fact that the group agreed to a ceasefire shows they retain some power in Gaza. The Gaza Strip is almost completely destroyed. It is difficult to get past the huge numbers of people who are wounded, bereaved, homeless or traumatised.
Hamas on Monday 13 October 2025 freed 20 surviving Israeli hostages, all men, who arrived back in Israel, where they will reunite with their families and undergo medical checks. The bodies of the remaining 28 dead hostages are also expected to be handed over as part of the deal, although the exact timing remained unclear. The hostages' return capped a painful chapter for Israel. Since they were captured in the attack that ignited the war, newscasts have marked their days in captivity and Israelis have worn yellow pins and ribbons in solidarity. Tens of thousands have joined their families in weekly demonstrations calling for their release.
Israel released Palestinian prisoners under the first phase of a ceasefire agreement brokered by US President Donald Trump. Israel began releasing hundreds of Palestinian prisoners as part of a ceasefire pausing two years of war that pummeled the territory, killed tens of thousands of Palestinians, and had left scores of captives in militant hands. Buses carrying dozens of freed Palestinian prisoners arrived in the West Bank city of Ramallah and in the Gaza Strip, as Israel began releasing more than 1,900 prisoners and detainees as part of the ceasefire deal. The prisoners being released include 250 people serving life sentences for convictions in attacks on Israelis, in addition to 1,700 seized from Gaza during the war and held without charge. They will be returned to the West Bank or Gaza or sent into exile.
The plan envisions an eventual role for the Palestinian Authority – something Netanyahu has long opposed. But it requires the authority, which administers parts of the West Bank, to undergo a sweeping reform program that could take years. The plan also calls for an Arab-led international security force in Gaza, along with Palestinian police trained by Egypt and Jordan. It said Israeli forces would leave areas as those forces deploy. About 200 US troops are now in Israel to monitor the ceasefire. The plan also mentions the possibility of a future Palestinian state, another nonstarter for Netanyahu.
After months of gridlock, US President Donald Trump secured a long-awaited ceasefire and hostage deal between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist militant group Hamas. The United States is deploying up to 200 troops to Israel to help oversee the Gaza cease-fire process in coordination with regional partners. The October 2025 ceasefire announced by President Trump represents the third major attempt to end hostilities in this two-year conflict, and historical patterns suggest significant vulnerabilities that could lead to its breakdown.
The track record of previous ceasefires provides sobering context for the current agreement's prospects. A brief November 2023 ceasefire lasted only one week before collapsing entirely. More significantly, the January 2025 ceasefire agreement that began on January 19 completely fell apart on March 18, 2025, when Israel launched extensive surprise airstrikes on Gaza during Ramadan, killing over 400 Palestinians according to Gaza's health ministry. That breakdown followed weeks of escalating tensions, mutual accusations of violations, disputes over hostage releases and prisoner exchanges, and fundamental disagreements about extending the ceasefire into subsequent phases. Netanyahu's office stated the March attacks responded to Hamas refusing to release additional hostages and rejecting proposals to extend the cease-fire, while Hamas accused Israel of systematic violations including daily killings and blocking humanitarian aid.
The war began when Hamas-led militants launched a surprise attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, in which some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, were killed and 251 taken hostage. In Israel’s ensuing offensive, more than 67,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry, which doesn’t differentiate between civilians and combatants but says around half the dead were women and children. The ministry is part of the Hamas-run government, and the U.N. and many independent experts consider its figures to be the most reliable estimate of wartime casualties. Gazans' opinions varied between those in favor and those against disarming the Palestinian resistance, led by Hamas.
The Israeli army announced on 10 October 2025 the completion of its withdrawal from the Gaza Strip to the "yellow line," and the ceasefire officially began at 12:00 PM local time. An Israeli military spokesman provided the latest developments regarding the deployment of forces to the sites agreed upon with Hamas. Following approval of the agreement, 600 trucks loaded with humanitarian aid were to enter the Gaza Strip daily, as well as equipment to repair damaged infrastructure. Israel would now allow residents to leave and return to Egypt under security supervision.
A secret annex to the agreement, stipulates that Israel would allow Gazans who left the Strip to return to the Strip via the Rafah crossing, according to Israeli Army Radio. Hamas prisoners would be released instead of Fatah prisoners, in accordance with agreements reached with the United States and mediators. Among the prisoners expected to be added to the release list, subject to government approval, were Mahmoud Musa Issa, the dean of Hamas prisoners, who is serving three life sentences and 46 years; Ahmed Jamal Ahmed; and military official Murad Badr Abdullah Da'is.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said that Hamas must be destroyed following the return of hostages from Gaza. Smotrich said he will not vote in favour of a ceasefire deal with Hamas to end the war in Gaza, but stopped short of threatening to bring down prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's coalition government. "There is immense fear of the consequences of emptying the prisons and releasing the next generation of terrorist leaders who will do everything to continue to pour rivers of Jewish blood here, God forbid," Smotrich said on X. "For this reason alone, we cannot join in short-sighted celebrations or vote in favour of the deal."
The final draft of the first phase of a Gaza peace deal was signed “by all parties” on 09 October 2025, Israeli government spokeswoman Shosh Bedrosian said. According to the proposed ceasefire plans, if Israel withdraws its forces to a perimeter around Gaza, the US, Qatar and possibly Turkey could be in charge of guaranteeing that once the hostages are released, Israel will not return to war. The agreement meant fighting will stop, Israel will partially withdraw from the Palestinian enclave and Hamas will free hostages in exchange for prisoners held by Israel. In Gaza, where most of the population of more than 2 million people had been displaced by Israeli bombing, young men applauded in the devastated streets, even as Israeli strikes continued. But the breakthrough ceasefire is also being met with caution.
The Israeli military said it was preparing to pull back troops in Gaza after Israel and Hamas agreed a ceasefire deal to free the remaining hostages. "Following the political echelon’s instructions and due to the situational assessment, the IDF has begun operational preparations ahead of the implementation of the agreement. As part of this process, preparations and a combat protocol are underway to transition to adjusted deployment lines soon. The IDF continues to be deployed in the area and prepared for any operational development." the military said in a statement.
Israel did not intend to release prominent Palestinian leader Marwan Barghouti as part of an agreement reached with Hamas to free Israeli hostages held in Gaza in exchange for Palestinian prisoners, an Israeli government spokesperson said. "I can tell you at this point in time that he will not be part of this release," spokesperson Shosh Bedrosian told reporters. Earlier, Israel and Hamas agreed in indirect talks that the 48 hostages held by militants in Gaza would be released in exchange around 2,000 Palestinian prisoners held by Israel.
The UN agency for Palestinian refugees welcomed the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas as a "huge relief", and said it was ready to provide Gaza with desperately-needed food. "UNRWA has food, medicines and other basic supplies to go to Gaza. We have enough to provide food for the entire population for the coming three months," the agency's chief Philippe Lazzarini said. The Egyptian Red Crescent said that 153 trucks carrying aid were headed into Gaza via the Rafah border crossing following the announcement of a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas. Two sources from the Egyptian aid organisation confirmed that "153 aid trucks entered through the Rafah crossing's bypass road, en route to the Kerem Shalom crossing, to be brought into the Gaza Strip". Among the trucks were 80 from the United Nations, 21 from Qatar and 17 from the Egyptian Red Crescent, they added.
Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas hailed a Gaza ceasefire deal agreed by Israel and Hamas on Thursday, saying he hoped it could lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. In a statement on social media, Abbas "welcomed the announcement by US President Donald Trump of an agreement to cease the war on the Gaza Strip," and "expressed hope that these efforts would be a prelude to reaching a permanent political solution... leading to an end to the Israeli occupation of the State of Palestine and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state".
The October 2025 agreement faces multiple structural vulnerabilities that mirror conditions preceding earlier collapses. Senior U.S. officials openly acknowledged on Thursday that the deal remains extremely fragile, stating there are many ways this arrangement could still go wrong and emphasizing the need to stay on top of details to ensure both parties fulfill obligations and quickly adjudicate misunderstandings. The mutual distrust between Israel and Hamas runs extraordinarily deep after two years of devastating conflict. Senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya explicitly stated that Hamas does not trust Israel "not even for a second" and demanded real guarantees that the war would end permanently and not be restarted, directly accusing Israel of violating the two previous ceasefires. This fundamental lack of trust creates conditions where any perceived violation or misunderstanding could rapidly spiral into renewed hostilities.
Critical aspects of the agreement remain dangerously vague or unresolved, creating multiple potential flashpoints for collapse. The deal's most contentious provisions involve Hamas disarmament and future Gaza governance. Trump's 20-point plan explicitly calls for Hamas to disarm completely and give up any future role in governing Gaza, with Palestinian technocrats instead running day-to-day affairs under international supervision. However, Hamas has not publicly stated it will disarm or relinquish governance, and senior Hamas leader Mahmoud Mardawi made clear the group does not believe it lost the war, declaring the ceasefire represents the fruit of legendary Palestinian steadfastness that imposed terms on the enemy. This fundamental disconnect between what Israel and the U.S. claim the agreement requires and what Hamas actually intends to do virtually guarantees future confrontations.
The precise details and overall timeline for Israeli troop withdrawal remain unclear despite being central to the agreement's implementation. Israel is supposed to pull back from cities and populated areas to a buffer zone on Gaza's edges as the ceasefire solidifies, but the exact locations of withdrawal lines and the pace of pullback are not definitively established. Trump's framework references a yellow line showing multiple stages of withdrawal, but sources indicate the exact location may have shifted during negotiations and the full details have not been made public. Netanyahu has simultaneously affirmed Israel's commitment to the agreement while threatening to return to war if demands are not met the easy way, maintaining that Israel reserves the right to resume military operations if it deems negotiations ineffective. His statement after signing the deal emphasized that the government approved the framework for hostage release while preserving Israel's security interests and right to protect its citizens.
Domestic political pressures within Israel create powerful incentives for Netanyahu to abandon the ceasefire once immediate political benefits are secured. Far-right members of Netanyahu's coalition, particularly National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, have effectively gained veto power over policy decisions and strongly oppose any deal that releases Palestinian prisoners or leaves Hamas with any capacity to govern. Smotrich explicitly stated he would not support the agreement, expressing great fear about releasing prisoners who would become the next generation of terror leadership. These coalition partners have previously threatened to collapse Netanyahu's government over ceasefire agreements, and their opposition creates domestic political pressure for Netanyahu to either abandon the deal entirely or interpret its terms in ways that provoke Hamas to withdraw, allowing Israel to blame Hamas for the collapse while resuming military operations.
An unprecedented division exists in the Israeli media following the Gaza agreement, with some viewing it as a historic shift that ends the longest war, and others considering it a political and security defeat. There is uproar in Tel Aviv, and unanswered questions about the day after the war. An unprecedented division has gripped the Israeli landscape following the Gaza agreement, with the occupation's newspapers filled with contradictory headlines between those describing the agreement as a historic transformation and those viewing it as a political and security defeat.
The state of confusion within the Hebrew media reflects the dilemma facing the Israeli occupation authorities in answering the pending question: What comes after the war? Under headlines such as "The next day is still missing," the Israeli press was preoccupied with interpreting the ceasefire agreement in Gaza. Channel 12 viewed it as a dramatic shift thanks to the mediation of US President Donald Trump, who described it as "amazing" and "very good for Tel Aviv." Channel 14, on the other hand, focused on what it described as Hamas's happiness, arguing that the cessation of the war meant the army had failed to achieve its goals.
Haaretz criticized what it called a hasty agreement imposed by American pressure and Trump's efforts to conclude it before the Nobel Peace Prize, warning that the new settlement did not answer the question of who would govern Gaza after Hamas, or how it would be disarmed. Meanwhile, Maariv spoke of unrealistic pledges relying on parties such as Turkey and Qatar, describing them as unreliable.
On the Yedioth Ahronoth website, commentators emphasized that the agreement does not mean an end to the war, given the lack of guarantees for a lasting peace, and because the disarmament of Hamas and the future governance of the Gaza Strip will remain a matter of long-standing disagreement.
The Ynet website highlighted the scenes of celebration in Gaza, quoting Hamas leaders as saying that the agreement was a political and popular victory achieved thanks to the steadfastness of the Palestinians, and that what the occupation authorities failed to impose by force was achieved by the resistance at the negotiating table.
Hebrew media analyses did not stop at the field, but extended to Tel Aviv's image in the world. The diplomatic correspondent for Yedioth Ahronoth wrote that international hostility toward the occupying entity has reached unprecedented levels, and that restoring its standing in public opinion will be "a nearly impossible task."
In the same vein, Israeli affairs researchers have asserted that the events taking place within the occupied entity reflect a state of cautious peace. They point to a sharp division in public opinion between government supporters and opponents, who hold Netanyahu responsible for the failure and accuse him of being preoccupied with his political future.
The historical pattern from March 2025 suggests a specific mechanism through which collapse could occur. As the first phase concluded in March, disputes emerged over extending the ceasefire and moving to the second phase involving permanent cessation of hostilities and reconstruction. Netanyahu's office endorsed a U.S. plan to extend the truce during Ramadan and Passover, proposing that half the remaining hostages be released immediately and the rest at the end of the extension period if permanent peace was reached. Hamas rejected this extension proposal, insisting the second phase should proceed as originally planned. In response, Israel immediately ceased allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza on March 2, violating the ceasefire terms according to mediators Egypt, Qatar, and the United Nations. Within two weeks, Israel launched the surprise airstrikes that shattered the truce entirely, with Netanyahu declaring Israel had resumed combat in full force and the strikes were just the beginning.
This March pattern could easily repeat itself with the October agreement. The current deal similarly has multiple phases requiring further negotiation on essential issues including Hamas's military capabilities, governance structures, and permanent peace terms. As the November deadline approaches for completing the first phase, similar disputes will likely emerge about extending the ceasefire and transitioning to subsequent phases. Israel has already demonstrated willingness to use hostage release disputes and negotiation impasses as justification for abandoning ceasefires and resuming full-scale military operations. Hamas has shown willingness to temporarily suspend hostage releases when accusing Israel of violations, creating pretexts Israel can exploit to justify military action.
Ongoing Israeli military actions even as the ceasefire takes effect demonstrate the agreement's fragility from its first moments. Israeli strikes in Gaza continued throughout Thursday October 9 after the cabinet approved the deal, with 27 Palestinians killed on the same day Israel agreed to the ceasefire according to hospital officials, including eight killed in Israeli fire on Thursday itself and 19 additional casualties from bodies recovered under rubble and individuals succumbing to wounds. An Israeli strike on a home in Gaza City left over 40 Palestinians trapped under rubble including women and children, killing at least six according to Gaza's Civil Defense. The Israeli military claimed it targeted a Hamas terrorist cell but provided no evidence. These continued strikes while the deal was being finalized and approved suggest Israel interprets its military freedom broadly and may continue operations it deems necessary for security regardless of ceasefire terms, creating immediate grounds for Hamas to accuse Israel of violations.
The question of who will govern Gaza and pay for reconstruction remains fundamentally unresolved despite being central to any sustainable peace. Trump and Netanyahu have categorically ruled out any Hamas role in governance, proposing instead that Palestinian technocrats administer the territory under an international transitional authority potentially including European Union involvement. However, Hamas maintains effective control over significant portions of Gaza and has made clear it does not accept being written out of Gaza's future. Multiple news outlets including Israeli media stated after the January ceasefire took effect that Israel had ultimately failed to destroy Hamas, which retained control over the Gaza Strip despite heavy losses. Without agreement on governance structures and Hamas's genuine willingness to disarm and cede power, the fundamental political conflict that sparked the war remains unresolved, making renewed violence highly likely once immediate humanitarian imperatives are addressed.
International accountability mechanisms and guarantees remain weak despite their critical importance for sustaining the ceasefire. Hamas has demanded real guarantees from mediators that Israel will not restart the war after securing hostage releases, referencing the two previous ceasefire collapses as evidence of Israel's unreliability. While senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya claimed the group received guarantees from U.S. officials and mediators that the war had fully and completely ended, it remains entirely unclear what concrete mechanisms exist to prevent Israel from resuming military operations if Netanyahu decides Hamas has violated terms or negotiations have become ineffective. Trump's personal involvement and threats of consequences for violations may provide temporary leverage, but sustaining commitment across multiple phases requiring months of implementation depends on enforcement mechanisms and international pressure that have proven inadequate in previous ceasefire attempts.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza creates both imperatives for peace and conditions that make sustained ceasefire difficult. By August 2025, famine was officially declared in Gaza City and surrounding areas with more than half a million people facing catastrophic hunger, starvation, and death. Over 67,000 Palestinians have been killed according to Gaza's health ministry in the two-year conflict, with an additional 169,679 wounded and virtually the entire population of two million displaced at various points. Entire cities have been reduced to rubble, hospitals and schools destroyed, and basic infrastructure rendered non-functional. This catastrophic humanitarian situation creates overwhelming pressure on all parties to stop fighting, but the scale of destruction and trauma also creates deep grievances, desire for accountability and justice, and determination not to accept terms perceived as surrender or capitulation, making political compromises extraordinarily difficult.
Trump's personal investment in the deal and desire for a Nobel Peace Prize announced for October 10 provides temporary incentive to sustain the ceasefire, but also creates risks if his attention shifts or he faces criticism for perceived failures. Trump has publicly celebrated the agreement as validation of his approach and credited his pressure and threats for bringing both parties to terms. He plans to visit Egypt for an official signing and Israel to address parliament and meet freed hostages. However, Trump has shown willingness to reverse course rapidly when deals don't produce desired results, and domestic political calculations could easily override commitment to sustaining diplomatic engagement if the ceasefire faces difficulties. His demand that Israel immediately stop bombing Gaza after Hamas's initial response surprised Netanyahu and forced Israel to halt operations, demonstrating Trump's willingness to pressure Israel, but the durability of this pressure across weeks and months of implementation challenges remains uncertain.
Regional actors including Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey serving as mediators have incentives to sustain the ceasefire but limited enforcement capacity when faced with determined violations by either party. These mediators successfully brokered the agreement and will oversee humanitarian provisions, but past experience shows they cannot compel compliance when Israel or Hamas decide their interests require abandoning negotiated terms. The European Union has expressed interest in playing a role through its border missions and has committed to resuming operations at the Rafah crossing, but European involvement faces resistance from Israel and skepticism about effectiveness given the EU's limited leverage over Israeli decision-making.
The most likely scenario based on historical patterns and current dynamics involves the ceasefire holding through the initial hostage releases and prisoner exchanges over the coming days and weeks, providing temporary relief and generating positive international attention, but then facing escalating tensions and violations as parties attempt to negotiate the second and third phases involving permanent peace terms, Hamas disarmament, complete Israeli withdrawal, and governance structures. Disputes over interpreting terms, implementing provisions, and moving to subsequent phases will likely emerge, with each party accusing the other of violations and bad faith. Netanyahu faces powerful domestic political incentives to resume military operations once immediate benefits of hostage releases are secured, particularly if he can construct narratives blaming Hamas for obstruction or violations that justify returning to combat. Hamas faces pressure to demonstrate it has not surrendered or accepted terms that permanently weaken its position, making genuine disarmament and governance concessions politically difficult even if leadership is inclined to accept them.
The March 2025 ceasefire collapsed almost exactly two months after taking effect, breaking down as the first phase concluded and negotiations for subsequent phases proved intractable. The October 2025 agreement faces similar structural vulnerabilities at similar timeframes, suggesting a collapse between late November and early January is quite possible if not likely. However, several factors could potentially sustain this attempt longer than previous efforts, including Trump's personal involvement and threats of consequences, broader international pressure and attention, the catastrophic humanitarian situation creating powerful imperatives for sustained peace, and possible evolution in calculations by both Israeli and Hamas leadership about the costs of continuing conflict versus accepting imperfect compromise terms.
Ultimately, the ceasefire's survival depends on whether fundamental political issues driving the conflict can be resolved through negotiation, or whether both parties conclude their core interests require returning to military confrontation. The agreement's extreme fragility, unresolved core issues, weak enforcement mechanisms, deep mutual distrust, and historical pattern of previous collapses all suggest significant risk of breakdown, though the timing and specific trigger for collapse remain uncertain and dependent on choices both parties will make in coming weeks as implementation challenges emerge.
US President Donald Trump's 20-point plan envisions a temporary technocratic committee overseen by an international “Board of Peace”, with the Palestinian Authority reclaiming control later – a vision critics say sidelines many Gazans and revives echoes of colonial rule. the “historic dawn of a new Middle East” that Trump claims will ring in “peace for all eternity” is still a very distant prospect. And the future of the Gaza Strip hangs in the balance. In Trump's 20-point plan, he envisioned a Gaza initially governed by a temporary transitional committee made up of “apolitical” Palestinian technocrats that would be supervised by a so-called Board of Peace, spearheaded by Trump himself and involving former UK prime minister Tony Blair, a veteran Middle East negotiator. Governance would then theoretically be handed over to the Palestinian Authority once it enacts key reforms. Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, attended an international summit on Monday in Egypt aimed at finalising an agreement on how to end the war in Gaza. But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already pushed back on the Palestinian Authority's role in the plan and seems unlikely to accept it. The Trump proposal also stipulates that Hamas would have no governing power in Gaza, but the group has said it expects to have some future role as part of a “unified Palestinian movement”. And preceding all of this is the mammoth task of reconstructing the entire Gaza Strip, which has been devastated by two years of war.
The only real positive for the people of Gaza is that Trump's plan specified Palestinians would not be expelled from the enclave. The plan seems to have quite strong colonial overtures to it, particularly the involvement of Tony Blair. He is a very controversial figure in the Middle East and [his involvement] has raised comparisons to the British Mandate, which governed Palestine for 30 years prior to [the establishment of Israel] in 1948. There has also been criticism from some Palestinian figures that the plan seems to be what some are calling the “remote control” of Gaza. Meaning it would not be led by people who are from Gaza, nor from people inside Gaza itself.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
