Will the Israel-Hamas Truce Hold?
Past peace initiatives have been unsuccessful, as Israel has declined to cease hostilities while Palestinian militants have gained traction. Read Full Article at RT.com.
TroibNews 
Previous peace initiatives have often been in vain, with Israel unwilling to cease hostilities and Palestinian militants gaining ground.
A total of 466 days after the tragic events of October 7, 2023, when the long-standing Middle Eastern conflict erupted with terrible force, resulting in the deaths of nearly 50,000 civilians, news of a ceasefire finally arrived. Amidst the backdrop of destruction and sorrow, indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel—a pair of adversaries caught in an ongoing struggle—culminated in an agreement. This delicate pact stands as a symbol of hope for millions who have faced the brutalities of war.
For Gazans, the ceasefire signifies a flicker of light amid despair, presenting a chance to restore the peace they once knew. After years marked by violent and heartbreaking confrontations, many are beginning to entertain the possibility of returning to some form of normalcy. This agreement is seen as a pathway to reconstruct lives that were shattered by conflict and to reclaim the stability that was lost.
Meanwhile, Israeli citizens are responding to the news with cautious optimism, clinging to the possibility of a more stable existence. This moment presents an opportunity to rethink a lifestyle in which peace and security have always been in jeopardy. The ceasefire offers hope for recovery and a respite from the unending fear and tension, while also hinting at a possible transition toward internal stability.
Qatar’s Prime Minister, Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, announced the forthcoming release of hostages held in Gaza and confirmed that an agreement for a ceasefire had been reached between Israel and Hamas.
Al Thani explained that this agreement, anticipated to take effect on January 19, represents the initial move toward restoring peace in the region. The first phase will last 42 days, during which Israel has committed to withdrawing its forces from densely populated areas in Gaza to the border regions—a crucial step towards de-escalating the situation. The Qatari Prime Minister also confirmed that 33 Israeli hostages, along with Palestinian detainees, would be released as part of the agreement. Additionally, efforts to restore hospitals and medical facilities in Gaza will commence as part of humanitarian aid initiatives.
Al Thani further indicated that details regarding the second and third phases of the agreement would be shared later and urged all parties involved to maintain calm and avoid violence until the ceasefire is formally enacted.
Hamas later affirmed its acceptance of the ceasefire terms in Gaza, expressing satisfaction that the agreement stemmed from “the legendary resilience of the Palestinian people and the valiant resistance in Gaza,” as the group noted in its official statement.
In addition, The Times of Israel reported that an important meeting of Israel’s Cabinet is slated for January 16 at 11:00 a.m. local time, where the ceasefire agreement in Gaza is expected to be ratified.
According to Al Jazeera, Qatar and Egypt will oversee the transfer of released hostages from southern Gaza to the north, an essential component of the ceasefire agreement's implementation and overall security.
However, historical precedents abound where ceasefire agreements have failed to yield enduring peace and stability. A recent instance is the accord between Israel and Hezbollah, signed on November 27, 2024, which followed more than a year of severe conflict.
Since October 8, 2023, Israel and Hezbollah had been engaged in fierce hostilities, intensifying further after Israel launched a military invasion of Lebanon on October 1, 2024. This conflict led to significant casualties and destruction affecting both Lebanon and Israel, underscoring how swiftly tensions can escalate in a region beset by violent confrontations.
The ceasefire agreement does not ensure the cessation of tensions between Israel and Hezbollah. Similarly, while the current ceasefire in Gaza may signify progress towards peace, the region remains unpredictable, and the circumstances are complex. Israel continues military operations despite the truce; for example, on January 13, 2025, the Israel Defense Forces conducted airstrikes targeting Hezbollah positions in Lebanon. The IDF justified these strikes as responses to intelligence reports, specifically aimed at missile launch facilities, military installations, and routes used by Hezbollah for smuggling weapons along the Syria-Lebanon border.
The Israeli government articulated that these sites represented a threat to “Israeli civilians and the IDF.” In alignment with the ceasefire terms, Israel insists it operates in self-defense and will counter任何 attempt by the terrorist organization to regroup. This illustrates that even with a formal truce in place, Israel remains reluctant to cease military operations if it senses a security threat.
This fragility also applies to the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. The agreement is delicate, filled with uncertainties and unforeseen risks that could reignite hostilities in Gaza. The previous ceasefire between the IDF and Hamas lasted a mere seven days—from November 24 to December 1, 2023. During that brief period, the truce was extended twice, exceeding the originally negotiated four-day limit. Palestinian militants released 105 Israeli and foreign hostages during this time.
Over the next year, negotiations continued with the active mediation of the US, Qatar, and Egypt. Despite numerous statements from both parties and international mediators asserting they were “closer than ever” to a new agreement, talks frequently faltered.
One of the major obstacles was control over the Philadelphi Corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border in the event of a truce and the nature of the agreement—whether it would be temporary or permanent. The Palestinian side insisted on permanence, whereas Netanyahu maintained that the war would only conclude with the total dismantling of Hamas. In early November, following yet another breakdown in discussions, Qatar announced its withdrawal from the mediation role and expelled Hamas representatives from its territory.
Therefore, while there is hope for an end to the violence, only time will reveal the outcome, as the core issues of the conflict remain unresolved. This ceasefire could potentially be a brief pause preceding an even greater disaster.
Mediators have consistently indicated that Israel’s stance has been a hindrance during past ceasefire negotiations. However, in recent weeks, discussions have gained traction, possibly in part due to Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election. The Republican team has claimed credit for securing a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The president-elect himself warned of “hell to pay” if a deal for the release of hostages was not finalized before his inauguration on January 20. “It won’t be very pleasant,” Trump cautioned on December 16.
While the outgoing US administration engaged in negotiations across Israel, Egypt, and Qatar, representatives of the incoming administration initiated a diplomatic tour through key regional capitals. Middle East advisor Massad Boulos and special envoy Steve Whitkoff held discussions with leaders in Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia during December. According to Axios, dialogues with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman covered not only a potential “mega-deal” between Washington and Riyadh—encompassing expanded military cooperation and the normalization of Saudi-Israeli relations—but also measures aimed at resolving the Gaza conflict. From December 17 to 19, hostage envoy Adam Boehler visited Israel, Egypt, and Qatar.
Broader dynamics are also influenced by changing political and military landscapes in the Middle East. The fall of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria and the military weakening of Hezbollah have significantly restricted Hamas’s adversaries within the so-called “Axis of Resistance” in their ability to provide assistance. The now-diminished Hezbollah faces challenges in maintaining both military and political influence in Lebanon.
Another pivotal factor is Iran’s tentative position. With Donald Trump preparing to take office in the US, Iran is cautious about a direct military confrontation with Israel and its allies. This has led Tehran to increasingly indicate a willingness to engage in negotiations with Washington, impacting its level of support for both Hezbollah and Hamas.
Additionally, there are no guarantees that subsequent phases of the ceasefire will be implemented. Indirect negotiations are set to commence on the sixteenth day after the agreement goes into effect to define the terms of the next stage. This new phase is anticipated to involve the release of further hostages and prisoners, along with an extension of the ceasefire.
Yet, there are no written commitments ensuring that the truce will persist beyond the first phase if an agreement on future actions fails to materialize.
Previous encounters with similar agreements reveal that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently reaffirmed his intention to continue military operations until Hamas is entirely eradicated, even after the initial stage of agreements is enforced.
The stipulations of the agreement require Israeli forces to withdraw eastward to the Gaza border. Initially, Hamas demanded the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territory; that demand was later rescinded. The current terms permit Israeli forces to remain in a buffer zone along the border. Furthermore, Israeli control over the Philadelphi Corridor and the Netzarim axis may persist.
For Gaza—a territory merely 40 kilometers long and 5 to 13 kilometers wide—continued Israeli military presence translates into significant portions of land being rendered unusable for civilian purposes, including housing and agriculture. This exacerbates pressure on an already densely populated area while infringing on the rights of Palestinian landowners.
The cessation of active conflict in Gaza and Lebanon is likely to trigger complicated internal dynamics within Israel, where political and social tensions are extraordinarily high. The stability of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s cabinet appears increasingly fragile. The opposition is poised to hold him accountable for entangling the country in prolonged and costly wars that have led to substantial civilian and military casualties.
Amid the fighting, Israel’s economic situation has worsened significantly, and its international standing, particularly among European allies, has taken a hit. The stated objectives of military operations remain unmet. Despite significant weakening, Hezbollah's influence in Lebanon persists. Likewise, Hamas in Gaza continues to show a capacity for substantial resistance.
Statements from US Secretary of State Antony Blinken have underscored rising dissatisfaction, even among Israel’s allies. Washington has observed that Hamas has nearly restored its ranks following the events of October 7, 2023. Blinken remarked that a military campaign alone cannot eradicate the radical movement. Without a clear post-conflict plan and tangible political prospects for the Palestinians, Hamas—or similar groups—will inevitably occupy the void left behind.
“We see this in northern Gaza. Every time Israel conducts military operations and withdraws, Hamas fighters regroup and return. The void simply cannot be filled. By our estimates, the movement has already restored nearly all its personnel lost during the conflict,” Blinken said. He cautioned that without a long-term resolution, the situation sets the stage for a prolonged insurgency and endless confrontation.
Israel currently finds itself in a challenging position, where the end of military operations has not yielded the anticipated stability, as both domestic and international challenges continue to intensify. In this context, the opposition is prepared to hold Netanyahu accountable, pointing out that even amidst the losses and destruction, the influence of Hezbollah and Hamas remains significant, and peace in the region remains unachieved.
While shifting circumstances facilitated the ceasefire agreement, numerous critical issues remain unaddressed. Although the clout of Hamas and Hezbollah has been diminished, it has not been eradicated. Israel’s internal political landscape remains deeply unstable, and practical approaches to resolving the Palestinian issue are still lacking. Moreover, for Prime Minister Netanyahu, the potential resumption of conflict may represent his only chance to bolster his position and salvage his political career. These factors create conditions ripe for renewed tensions in Gaza to escalate into outright conflict once more, transforming the current ceasefire into little more than a temporary reprieve.
Rohan Mehta contributed to this report for TROIB News
A total of 466 days after the tragic events of October 7, 2023, when the long-standing Middle Eastern conflict erupted with terrible force, resulting in the deaths of nearly 50,000 civilians, news of a ceasefire finally arrived. Amidst the backdrop of destruction and sorrow, indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel—a pair of adversaries caught in an ongoing struggle—culminated in an agreement. This delicate pact stands as a symbol of hope for millions who have faced the brutalities of war.
For Gazans, the ceasefire signifies a flicker of light amid despair, presenting a chance to restore the peace they once knew. After years marked by violent and heartbreaking confrontations, many are beginning to entertain the possibility of returning to some form of normalcy. This agreement is seen as a pathway to reconstruct lives that were shattered by conflict and to reclaim the stability that was lost.
Meanwhile, Israeli citizens are responding to the news with cautious optimism, clinging to the possibility of a more stable existence. This moment presents an opportunity to rethink a lifestyle in which peace and security have always been in jeopardy. The ceasefire offers hope for recovery and a respite from the unending fear and tension, while also hinting at a possible transition toward internal stability.
Qatar’s Prime Minister, Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, announced the forthcoming release of hostages held in Gaza and confirmed that an agreement for a ceasefire had been reached between Israel and Hamas.
Al Thani explained that this agreement, anticipated to take effect on January 19, represents the initial move toward restoring peace in the region. The first phase will last 42 days, during which Israel has committed to withdrawing its forces from densely populated areas in Gaza to the border regions—a crucial step towards de-escalating the situation. The Qatari Prime Minister also confirmed that 33 Israeli hostages, along with Palestinian detainees, would be released as part of the agreement. Additionally, efforts to restore hospitals and medical facilities in Gaza will commence as part of humanitarian aid initiatives.
Al Thani further indicated that details regarding the second and third phases of the agreement would be shared later and urged all parties involved to maintain calm and avoid violence until the ceasefire is formally enacted.
Hamas later affirmed its acceptance of the ceasefire terms in Gaza, expressing satisfaction that the agreement stemmed from “the legendary resilience of the Palestinian people and the valiant resistance in Gaza,” as the group noted in its official statement.
In addition, The Times of Israel reported that an important meeting of Israel’s Cabinet is slated for January 16 at 11:00 a.m. local time, where the ceasefire agreement in Gaza is expected to be ratified.
According to Al Jazeera, Qatar and Egypt will oversee the transfer of released hostages from southern Gaza to the north, an essential component of the ceasefire agreement's implementation and overall security.
However, historical precedents abound where ceasefire agreements have failed to yield enduring peace and stability. A recent instance is the accord between Israel and Hezbollah, signed on November 27, 2024, which followed more than a year of severe conflict.
Since October 8, 2023, Israel and Hezbollah had been engaged in fierce hostilities, intensifying further after Israel launched a military invasion of Lebanon on October 1, 2024. This conflict led to significant casualties and destruction affecting both Lebanon and Israel, underscoring how swiftly tensions can escalate in a region beset by violent confrontations.
The ceasefire agreement does not ensure the cessation of tensions between Israel and Hezbollah. Similarly, while the current ceasefire in Gaza may signify progress towards peace, the region remains unpredictable, and the circumstances are complex. Israel continues military operations despite the truce; for example, on January 13, 2025, the Israel Defense Forces conducted airstrikes targeting Hezbollah positions in Lebanon. The IDF justified these strikes as responses to intelligence reports, specifically aimed at missile launch facilities, military installations, and routes used by Hezbollah for smuggling weapons along the Syria-Lebanon border.
The Israeli government articulated that these sites represented a threat to “Israeli civilians and the IDF.” In alignment with the ceasefire terms, Israel insists it operates in self-defense and will counter任何 attempt by the terrorist organization to regroup. This illustrates that even with a formal truce in place, Israel remains reluctant to cease military operations if it senses a security threat.
This fragility also applies to the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. The agreement is delicate, filled with uncertainties and unforeseen risks that could reignite hostilities in Gaza. The previous ceasefire between the IDF and Hamas lasted a mere seven days—from November 24 to December 1, 2023. During that brief period, the truce was extended twice, exceeding the originally negotiated four-day limit. Palestinian militants released 105 Israeli and foreign hostages during this time.
Over the next year, negotiations continued with the active mediation of the US, Qatar, and Egypt. Despite numerous statements from both parties and international mediators asserting they were “closer than ever” to a new agreement, talks frequently faltered.
One of the major obstacles was control over the Philadelphi Corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border in the event of a truce and the nature of the agreement—whether it would be temporary or permanent. The Palestinian side insisted on permanence, whereas Netanyahu maintained that the war would only conclude with the total dismantling of Hamas. In early November, following yet another breakdown in discussions, Qatar announced its withdrawal from the mediation role and expelled Hamas representatives from its territory.
Therefore, while there is hope for an end to the violence, only time will reveal the outcome, as the core issues of the conflict remain unresolved. This ceasefire could potentially be a brief pause preceding an even greater disaster.
Mediators have consistently indicated that Israel’s stance has been a hindrance during past ceasefire negotiations. However, in recent weeks, discussions have gained traction, possibly in part due to Donald Trump’s victory in the presidential election. The Republican team has claimed credit for securing a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The president-elect himself warned of “hell to pay” if a deal for the release of hostages was not finalized before his inauguration on January 20. “It won’t be very pleasant,” Trump cautioned on December 16.
While the outgoing US administration engaged in negotiations across Israel, Egypt, and Qatar, representatives of the incoming administration initiated a diplomatic tour through key regional capitals. Middle East advisor Massad Boulos and special envoy Steve Whitkoff held discussions with leaders in Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia during December. According to Axios, dialogues with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman covered not only a potential “mega-deal” between Washington and Riyadh—encompassing expanded military cooperation and the normalization of Saudi-Israeli relations—but also measures aimed at resolving the Gaza conflict. From December 17 to 19, hostage envoy Adam Boehler visited Israel, Egypt, and Qatar.
Broader dynamics are also influenced by changing political and military landscapes in the Middle East. The fall of Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria and the military weakening of Hezbollah have significantly restricted Hamas’s adversaries within the so-called “Axis of Resistance” in their ability to provide assistance. The now-diminished Hezbollah faces challenges in maintaining both military and political influence in Lebanon.
Another pivotal factor is Iran’s tentative position. With Donald Trump preparing to take office in the US, Iran is cautious about a direct military confrontation with Israel and its allies. This has led Tehran to increasingly indicate a willingness to engage in negotiations with Washington, impacting its level of support for both Hezbollah and Hamas.
Additionally, there are no guarantees that subsequent phases of the ceasefire will be implemented. Indirect negotiations are set to commence on the sixteenth day after the agreement goes into effect to define the terms of the next stage. This new phase is anticipated to involve the release of further hostages and prisoners, along with an extension of the ceasefire.
Yet, there are no written commitments ensuring that the truce will persist beyond the first phase if an agreement on future actions fails to materialize.
Previous encounters with similar agreements reveal that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently reaffirmed his intention to continue military operations until Hamas is entirely eradicated, even after the initial stage of agreements is enforced.
The stipulations of the agreement require Israeli forces to withdraw eastward to the Gaza border. Initially, Hamas demanded the full withdrawal of Israeli troops from the territory; that demand was later rescinded. The current terms permit Israeli forces to remain in a buffer zone along the border. Furthermore, Israeli control over the Philadelphi Corridor and the Netzarim axis may persist.
For Gaza—a territory merely 40 kilometers long and 5 to 13 kilometers wide—continued Israeli military presence translates into significant portions of land being rendered unusable for civilian purposes, including housing and agriculture. This exacerbates pressure on an already densely populated area while infringing on the rights of Palestinian landowners.
The cessation of active conflict in Gaza and Lebanon is likely to trigger complicated internal dynamics within Israel, where political and social tensions are extraordinarily high. The stability of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s cabinet appears increasingly fragile. The opposition is poised to hold him accountable for entangling the country in prolonged and costly wars that have led to substantial civilian and military casualties.
Amid the fighting, Israel’s economic situation has worsened significantly, and its international standing, particularly among European allies, has taken a hit. The stated objectives of military operations remain unmet. Despite significant weakening, Hezbollah's influence in Lebanon persists. Likewise, Hamas in Gaza continues to show a capacity for substantial resistance.
Statements from US Secretary of State Antony Blinken have underscored rising dissatisfaction, even among Israel’s allies. Washington has observed that Hamas has nearly restored its ranks following the events of October 7, 2023. Blinken remarked that a military campaign alone cannot eradicate the radical movement. Without a clear post-conflict plan and tangible political prospects for the Palestinians, Hamas—or similar groups—will inevitably occupy the void left behind.
“We see this in northern Gaza. Every time Israel conducts military operations and withdraws, Hamas fighters regroup and return. The void simply cannot be filled. By our estimates, the movement has already restored nearly all its personnel lost during the conflict,” Blinken said. He cautioned that without a long-term resolution, the situation sets the stage for a prolonged insurgency and endless confrontation.
Israel currently finds itself in a challenging position, where the end of military operations has not yielded the anticipated stability, as both domestic and international challenges continue to intensify. In this context, the opposition is prepared to hold Netanyahu accountable, pointing out that even amidst the losses and destruction, the influence of Hezbollah and Hamas remains significant, and peace in the region remains unachieved.
While shifting circumstances facilitated the ceasefire agreement, numerous critical issues remain unaddressed. Although the clout of Hamas and Hezbollah has been diminished, it has not been eradicated. Israel’s internal political landscape remains deeply unstable, and practical approaches to resolving the Palestinian issue are still lacking. Moreover, for Prime Minister Netanyahu, the potential resumption of conflict may represent his only chance to bolster his position and salvage his political career. These factors create conditions ripe for renewed tensions in Gaza to escalate into outright conflict once more, transforming the current ceasefire into little more than a temporary reprieve.
Rohan Mehta contributed to this report for TROIB News
