Gaza ceasefire enters year two amid stalled negotiations and continued violence
A ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that began in October 2025 remains fragile one year later. The agreement, brokered by the United States through its Trump administration's Board of Peace, was designed to proceed in phases: first halting fighting and exchanging hostages and prisoners, and second establishing civilian governance and Hamas disarmament. Phase one saw mixed results. According to Palestinian sources, over five thousand Israeli ceasefire violations have been documented, with airstrikes and military operations continuing throughout the period. Israeli officials counter that Hamas has committed violations and cite ongoing security threats. Humanitarian conditions remain dire with two million people in rubble and tents. Since October 2025, approximately 1,400 Palestinians and eight Israeli soldiers have died despite the ceasefire. Phase two negotiations have stalled over disagreements on Hamas disarmament timing and Israeli troop withdrawal. A July 2026 agreement on Hamas disarmament hinged on Israel fulfilling withdrawal obligations, yet implementation has not advanced. Mediators from Egypt, Qatar, Turkey and the United States continue diplomatic efforts, but significant obstacles remain.
Key facts
- A ceasefire began October 10, 2025, based on Trump's 20-point plan mediated by the Board of Peace
- Approximately 1,400 Palestinians and at least 8 Israeli soldiers have died since the ceasefire began
- Israel maintains effective control over approximately 50-55 percent of Gaza, including the Rafah crossing area
- Gaza's Government Media Office reported over 5,000 Israeli ceasefire violations as of September 2026
- Phase one included hostage-prisoner exchanges and humanitarian aid; phase two focuses on Hamas disarmament and reconstruction
- Israel controls roughly 64 percent of Gaza as of October 2026 according to Human Rights Watch, expanding beyond agreed boundaries
- A July 31, 2026 disarmament agreement made Hamas weapons surrender conditional on Israeli withdrawal and reconstruction progress
How different outlets framed it
Left-leaning coverage: Left-leaning outlets emphasize that the ceasefire exists largely in name only, with Israeli forces continuing systematic attacks and preventing humanitarian aid. They highlight that the ceasefire violates Palestinian rights to self-determination and point to displacement, forced occupation, and alleged war crimes that persist despite the agreement. Progressive commentary frames the situation as Israel using the ceasefire framework to maintain military control while preventing accountability.
Right-leaning coverage: Right-leaning perspectives, particularly from Israeli security analysts and government representatives, stress that Hamas must fully disarm before Israel can withdraw. They argue Israel's security concerns are legitimate given October 2023 attacks and cite Israeli aid truck deliveries and border crossing openings as evidence of good faith. This framing emphasizes that security arrangements must precede withdrawal and that Hamas's weaponry poses an ongoing threat.
Limits of this briefing
Coverage is dominated by human rights organizations and Palestinian-perspective outlets; fewer direct statements from mainstream Israeli media outlets on the record. The Trump administration's Board of Peace has faced criticism from human rights experts as resembling colonial governance, and political pressures from Israel's 2026 elections complicate negotiations.
Sources
- Al Jazeera: US declares phase two of Gaza ceasefire, but what did phase one deliver? Centre
- Council on Foreign Relations: A Guide to the Gaza Peace Deal Centre
- Human Rights Watch: Gaza: Ceasefire Anniversary Marks Year of Failed Promises Left
- Washington Institute: One Year After the Gaza Ceasefire (Part 3): Moving from War to Enduring Security Control Right
- Crisis Group: Hollow Promises: Resetting Gaza's Ceasefire Centre