The core issue gripping the Gaza conflict is the fragile and complex nature of peace negotiations, especially as recent military actions and political declarations challenge the prospects of lasting calm. But here's where it gets controversial: While announcements of ceasefire phases might seem like steps toward peace, many experts, residents, and officials question whether these symbolic gestures translate into meaningful change on the ground. This discussion is especially pertinent as new obstacles emerge, casting doubt on the actual progress.
On Thursday, Israeli military strikes in Gaza resulted in the deaths of nine individuals, including three women, a day after the United States declared that the current ceasefire would progress into its second phase. This escalation highlights the ongoing violence despite diplomatic efforts.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu dismissed the ceasefire announcement as largely symbolic, expressing doubts about the real substance behind the official statements. During a conversation with the parents of the last Israeli hostage whose remains are still in Gaza, Netanyahu described the Palestinian governing body's declaration as merely a "declarative move," implying that it lacks concrete substance, contrary to claims made by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff.
The families of hostages, such as that of Officer Ran Gvili, had earlier urged Netanyahu not to proceed with the ceasefire until their loved ones’ remains were returned. Netanyahu assured them that securing Gvili’s remains remained a top priority, yet many questions about how the ceasefire’s second phase will unfold remain unanswered.
One of the most significant questions concerns the composition of the proposed Palestinian governing committee, which is intended to include neutral experts. An Israeli official anonymously confirmed that this committee’s makeup was coordinated closely with Israel. Nonetheless, problems persist surrounding the timing and deployment of international forces, the reopening of Gaza’s southern Rafah crossing, and specific strategies for disarming Hamas and reconstructing Gaza’s infrastructure.
In an interview with Radio Basma, Palestinian engineer and former official Ali Shaath, who is expected to lead the new committee, estimated that rebuilding Gaza could take approximately three years, starting with addressing urgent needs such as shelter. He mentioned a rather aggressive approach: removing rubble by transportation into the sea to create new land, which he considers a significant step toward recovery.
Despite this significant progress, many Palestinians in Gaza are skeptical about what the phase two will change practically. Residents like Samed Abu Rawagh, displaced from Jabaliya, point out that the violence continues, and basic necessities remain hard to access. The Gaza Health Ministry reported over 450 deaths since the October ceasefire, including more than 100 children, with ongoing strikes killing civilians and causing injuries.
Local hospitals, such as Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital and Al-Awda Hospital in Nuseirat, confirm multiple casualties from recent attacks, while Israel has yet to comment officially on these incidents. The Israeli military did announce the killing of an individual who approached troops near the so-called Yellow Line—which separates the Israeli-controlled part of Gaza from other areas—suggesting that hostilities persist.
The displacement crisis remains severe. Many Palestinians, like those from eastern Khan Younis, voice hopes for tangible improvements rather than mere promises, emphasizing that relief efforts must go beyond words to bring real change—such as access to food, fuel, and medical supplies. With winter approaching, the population, exceeding two million, faces hardships including shortages of aid and inadequate housing, making recovery even more urgent.
Looking ahead, the second phase of the ceasefire introduces complex challenges not faced in the initial stages. These include disarming Hamas, establishing a new governing authority after almost twenty years of Hamas rule, and financing the extensive reconstruction efforts—estimated to cost over $50 billion. Few funds have been pledged so far, and the process is expected to take many years.
Hamas has announced plans to dissolve its current government to pave the way for the new committee. However, critical questions remain about what will happen to its military wing, civil service apparatus, and police forces. A Hamas official, Bassem Naim, expressed cautious optimism about the committee’s potential to help establish an independent Palestinian state but refrained from further detail, emphasizing that international powers must now act to enable Hamas’s participation.
Meanwhile, Israel maintains that Hamas must surrender its weapons, but the group’s leadership continues to reject surrender, citing their right to resist. This fundamental disagreement underscores the ongoing tension and complicates any efforts toward genuine peace. As discussions continue, the question remains—do these political declarations truly pave a way toward peace, or are they just more smoke and mirrors? What do you think—the international community’s efforts are enough, or is something more radical needed for a lasting resolution? Share your thoughts in the comments.
