Fragile Peace In Middle East

On January 19, 2025, a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas marked the end of 15 months of conflict and arduous negotiations. Mediated by Qatar’s Prime Minister, the agreement offered temporary respite to a region scarred by extensive devastation. As the truce took effect, celebrations erupted in Israel and the Gaza Strip, though some Israeli factions strongly opposed it. Originally proposed by outgoing U.S. President, the ceasefire was realised after incoming President Trump applied significant pressure. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu credited Trump for his pivotal role, tying the achievement to the legacy of the Abraham Accords from Trump’s earlier presidency.

 Observers speculate that the U.S. may soon extend military and financial aid to Israel and potentially overlook any contentious territorial expansions into Palestinian areas. The ceasefire brought a temporary relief to Gazans from continuous airstrikes, but they were left to rebuild their lives amid the widespread destruction of their ancestral lands. Over 90 per cent of the population had been displaced, struggling with severe shortages of food, medical supplies, and basic infrastructure. More than 47,000 Palestinians had lost their lives since October 7, 2023, leaving many to question the international community's role in addressing their plight.

Phased ceasefire

The ceasefire agreement consists of three phases. The first phase, lasting six weeks from January 19, began with Hamas releasing 33 Israeli captives, prioritising women, children, and the elderly. In exchange, Israel pledged to release at least 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Israeli forces also began withdrawing from Gaza, enabling displaced Palestinians to inspect their homes. Although humanitarian aid increased, it remains insufficient for the population. The second phase, following the first, aims to achieve a permanent resolution. Hamas is expected to release all remaining captives, including soldiers, while Israel releases more prisoners and completes its withdrawal. There is optimism that Nepali student Bipin Joshi, held by Hamas, will be freed during this phase.

The third phase, dependent on the success of the previous two, focuses on recovering the bodies of deceased captives and initiating long-term reconstruction projects in Gaza. Rebuilding efforts are estimated to require over $100 billion. Reactions to the ceasefire have been mixed. While families of captives in both Israel and Palestine expressed relief and cautious hope, doubts remain about its long-term viability. In Israel, far-right politicians like Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir criticised the agreement, warning that releasing trained Palestinian fighters might escalate future violence. 

On the Palestinian side, Dr. Bassim Naim of Hamas attributed the conflict to Israeli occupation and the blockade of humanitarian aid rather than the release of Palestinian prisoners. He urged international assistance for Gaza's reconstruction and condemned the outgoing U.S. administration for failing to hold Israel accountable. The ceasefire occurred as Iran’s regional influence waned, weakening its ties with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, alongside the decline of the Assad regime in Syria. This period also saw escalating tensions between Ukraine and Russia, which, despite Ukraine’s lack of direct involvement in the Middle East, has fully occupied Russian military resources. 

Tehran’s threats and unveiling of military bases have so far failed to sustain its capacity to provoke conflicts in the region, hindered by U.S. "maximum pressure" policies. However, Iranian Vice President Javad Zarif, in a January 2025 interview with Fareed Zakaria in Davos, dismissed claims linking this to U.S. tactics. Meanwhile, celebrations in Gaza marked the ceasefire as a victory over Israel, with armed demonstrations in the West Bank highlighting unresolved tensions and concerns about further violence, especially related to detainee releases. Israel remains alert to potential escalations, as groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis pledge continued resistance in support of Palestine. The ceasefire offers a brief respite but fails to resolve deeper, longstanding conflicts. 

Hamas might use the pause to regroup, while Israel aspires to dismantle the group entirely — a view often echoed by Prime Minister Netanyahu despite facing both domestic and international criticism. Observers agree that a lasting resolution between Israel and Palestine remains out of reach. Efforts such as a two-state solution or integrated coexistence have stalled due to entrenched mistrust and inequalities. Achieving peace would require substantial investments in education, economic opportunities, and fair treatment for both Palestinians and Israelis. If international powers like China, Russia, and Iran refrain from using Palestine as a tool against the U.S., it could potentially shift U.S. policies toward a more balanced stance on Palestinian issues. 

The global community cautiously monitors the ceasefire, balancing hope with an awareness of the region's volatile history. Whether a two-state solution — based on pre-1967 borders with land swaps and East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital — will gain acceptance remains uncertain. Neutral mediators could facilitate negotiations, ensuring fairness for both sides. Recognition of mutual rights — Israel’s right to exist and Palestine’s right to statehood — is essential, as is improving living conditions in Gaza and the West Bank. Gaza cannot remain an open prison indefinitely. International aid is critical for rebuilding infrastructure, homes, schools, and hospitals, while collaborative trade and economic projects could foster shared prosperity.

Practical step

To reduce recurrent violence, a demilitarised zone monitored by peacekeepers might be a practical step. Honouring ceasefire agreements, disarming militant groups in exchange for political inclusion and safety, and fostering trust through people-to-people connections are vital. Educational and community initiatives should emphasize shared values and mutual respect, supported by truth and reconciliation efforts to heal past grievances. Equitable leadership, adherence to international laws, and governance that respects human rights are fundamental for sustained peace.

Western powers and Israel should avoid exacerbating divisions within Palestinian communities, focusing instead on equitable solutions. Global actors, including the U.S. and the U.N., must maintain impartiality, promote peace through monitoring, constructive incentives, and fair mediation. By prioritising justice and equality, both communities can aspire to a future built on harmony and mutual respect.

 (The author is a professor of Geography, University of Central Missouri, USA. bhattarai@ucmo.edu)