Israel-Hamas Ceasefire Doomed From the Start
The fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas dissolved quickly, seemingly written on tissue paper. It collapsed before the second of three planned phases could begin, specifically when Israel declined to negotiate for it. The renewed conflict was inevitable, culminating in a series of IDF airstrikes across Gaza early Tuesday.
By Thursday, the IDF’s ground operations expanded, engaging in the northern Gaza Strip, around the Netzarim corridor (previously evacuated as part of the initial agreement), and in Rafah, southern Gaza.
Reports indicate at least 400 Gazans died in the initial strikes, marking one of the deadliest days of the conflict, according to the Associated Press. Palestinian health officials raised the death toll to potentially as high as . Social media reflects the intense conflict. The IDF asserts it is targeting terror infrastructure and key Hamas leaders, while Palestinians claim indiscriminate targeting. Hamas and the Houthis have intensified attacks against Israel.
Where will this escalation lead? Ironically, predicting the future seemed easier when the ceasefire was initially agreed upon two months ago.
From the moment the ceasefire details were released, analysts were skeptical of its long-term viability.
The initial phase involved the release of Israeli hostages in exchange for Palestinian prisoners, a temporary cessation of fighting, and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from densely populated areas and the Netzarim corridor. The subsequent phase aimed for a sustainable ceasefire, a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, and further exchanges of hostages and prisoners. The final phase was intended to end the war and facilitate the return of remains of both Israeli captives and Palestinians.
However, two key factors suggested the deal would not progress beyond its initial stage.
First, prominent figures within Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s coalition, particularly from the Religious Zionist and Jewish Power parties, threatened to withdraw support if the fighting ceased. Their stated objective was to capture and . The leader of Jewish Power, Itamar Ben Gvir, even resigned from Netanyahu’s government following the deal’s signing, thus weakening his coalition. Betzalel Smotrich, heading the Religious Zionist party, remained but demanded that Israel , which would mean invalidating the agreement or destabilizing the government.
Second, Israel’s past experiences with phased agreements, especially concerning Palestinians, suggest they are rarely successful. The Oslo peace process of the 1990s, for example, was perceived by Palestinians as a path to and a permanent resolution, neither of which materialized.
Did Hamas have a stronger desire to complete the ceasefire agreement than Israel? Most likely. Gaza is devastated, with nearly 50,000 casualties reported, and Palestinian has increased. Hamas leverages two key advantages among Palestinians: compelling Israel to release Palestinian prisoners and being the sole Palestinian faction capable of ending the war. Beyond these factors, Hamas relies on force to maintain power.
While the first phase of the ceasefire was implemented, Israel later refused to begin negotiations for the second phase, particularly after Trump assumed office and advocated for in Gaza. This emboldened Netanyahu to resist the second phase. Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, initiated negotiations for that phase seemingly anew, proposing a different from the original agreement.
Netanyahu is now grappling with numerous domestic political crises. A looms this month that may bring down his government; have restarted, with tens of thousands urging a new ceasefire and criticizing Netanyahu’s handling of the remaining hostages.
On some level, Israelis anticipated renewed conflict. A February by the Institute for National Security Studies revealed that only 40% believed the deal would reach the second phase, while 46% considered the chances slim.
The future remains uncertain. How long will this renewed conflict continue? Israel throughout the war—why would it succeed now? Will exhausted Israeli reservists maintain morale during a prolonged war? Will this forever war result in the complete re-occupation of Gaza, alongside ongoing settlement expansion and de facto annexation in the West Bank? The Israeli government hasn’t provided answers.
Will Hamas accept a U.S.-backed “” to reinstate and extend the ceasefire into April for further negotiations? Or will to simply all hostages and oust Hamas under work this time around?
A preferable solution involves ending the occupation through Palestinian self-determination and statehood, possibly supported by regional normalization agreements between Israel and Arab states. This would ensure Israel’s security and contribute to a more peaceful Middle East.
However, those with the capacity to forge peace appear to favor war.
“`