A year after Gaza ceasefire, diplomacy remains stuck

Sequencing dispute blocks the next phase

At the center of the impasse is sequencing. A July extension to the ceasefire framework called for Hamas to disarm gradually and in connection with phased Israeli withdrawal. Hamas confirmed for the first time that it had agreed to disarm, but tied that step to Israel halting strikes and withdrawing from Gaza.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later said Israel would not withdraw from any part of Gaza until Hamas was completely disarmed, rejecting the sequencing described in the U.S.-announced framework.¹

That disagreement has turned implementation into a diplomatic standoff. Israel can argue that Hamas’s weapons prevent movement toward withdrawal and reconstruction. Hamas can argue that Israel’s continued military presence and strikes remove the basis for disarmament. The dispute has also narrowed room for mediators to shift the process from ceasefire management to a political settlement.¹

Anadolu Agency reported that mediators including Egypt, Qatar and Türkiye said in August that continued Israeli attacks were obstructing the agreement’s second phase. It also reported that a roadmap linked restrictions on Palestinian faction weapons to additional Israeli withdrawals, deployment of an international force, transfer of governance and reconstruction.³

Governance transition remains incomplete

The ceasefire plan envisioned Hamas handing power to a committee of Palestinian administrators vetted by a new Board of Peace chaired by U.S. President Donald Trump. AP reported that Hamas officially dissolved its government in July but left the civil service intact and remained the dominant power in the roughly 40% of Gaza not under Israeli military control. Israel, AP reported, has barred the new Palestinian administration from entering Gaza through Egypt.¹

A parallel Palestinian political crisis has complicated the governance question. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas postponed legislative elections by nearly another year, moving them to Sept. 11, 2027. AP reported that the U.S.-brokered ceasefire plan outlined a future role for the Palestinian Authority in Gaza but left its immediate role mostly undefined. Hamas continued governing, while technocrats under the Board of Peace waited in Cairo for permission to enter Gaza.⁹

The absence of a governing handover leaves several questions unanswered: who controls ministries, courts and police; who manages reconstruction contracts and border crossings; and who has authority to coordinate with Israel, Egypt, donors and international agencies. For diplomats, that governance vacuum is not secondary to the security track. It is part of why the security track has not advanced.¹⁹

International force has not materialized

The ceasefire framework also called for an International Stabilization Force. AP reported that the force was announced in February but has not deployed. Indonesia had pledged the largest contingent, 8,000 troops, but put its plans on hold in the spring as attention shifted to the Iran war.¹

Without that force, there is no agreed mechanism to supervise a withdrawal, secure crossings, support local policing or reassure Israel that Hamas will not rebuild military capacity. Conversely, the lack of a credible security arrangement gives Hamas and other Palestinian factions little reason to believe disarmament would be followed by Israeli pullback or civilian recovery.¹³

That gap has helped keep the ceasefire in its narrowest form: an arrangement that reduces the scale of fighting while leaving core military and political disputes unresolved.

Withdrawal has stalled and partly reversed

Israel was supposed to withdraw from Gaza under the ceasefire plan. Instead, AP reported, it has maintained control over more than half the territory and pushed the so-called yellow line of control westward toward the Mediterranean Sea.¹

Anadolu, citing U.N. humanitarian reporting, said the initial ceasefire pullback left about 53% of Gaza under Israeli military deployment. By late June, Israeli forces had expanded westward beyond the yellow line, leaving 64.9% of Gaza under direct Israeli control or tighter restrictions. By August, nearly two-thirds of the enclave was inaccessible to Palestinians or subject to severe restrictions, according to the report.³

The territorial picture matters for more than military positioning. It affects where Palestinians can return, whether aid groups can operate, where reconstruction can begin and whether a future administration can exercise meaningful authority.

Reconstruction remains mostly theoretical

One year in, large-scale reconstruction has not started. AP reported that “almost nothing” has been rebuilt, while many Palestinians remain in tent camps, damaged buildings or rubble.¹

Anadolu reported that Gaza’s recovery and reconstruction needs were estimated at $71.4 billion over 10 years by the U.N., European Union and World Bank, including $26.3 billion in the first 18 months. The same assessment found that 1.9 million Palestinians had been displaced and 371,888 housing units damaged or destroyed.³

Construction materials remain a central constraint. Anadolu reported that Israeli restrictions continued on materials needed for shelter and construction, while OCHA said in September that urgently needed shelter supplies, including tents and construction materials, were still blocked.³

The Independent reported that the humanitarian situation had become increasingly desperate, with no meaningful rebuild of Gaza’s health system. It cited U.N. figures indicating that about 94% of Gaza’s population needed shelter assistance.⁶

Aid access has improved but remains contested

The ceasefire increased humanitarian access compared with the height of the war, but aid agencies and Israeli authorities continue to offer sharply different assessments of conditions.

COGAT, the Israeli defense ministry body responsible for civilian affairs in the Palestinian territories, told AFP that Gaza’s humanitarian situation was stable, according to France 24 reporting republished by ModernGhana. The U.N. World Food Programme’s Shaun Hughes said the food security situation remained “extremely serious,” with July figures showing 1.4 million of Gaza’s roughly 2.1 million people acutely food insecure and 200,000 one step below famine.⁸

Nutrition remains a major concern. The same AFP/France 24 report said limited dietary diversity continued to threaten children, pregnant women and breastfeeding mothers. It cited a Médecins du Monde study finding that 93% of pregnant or breastfeeding women had symptoms of anemia and only 17% had a sufficiently varied diet.⁸

Medical access is also constrained. An Al Jazeera opinion article by Medical Aid for Palestinians staff said regular deliveries of medical supplies and equipment remained restricted and medical evacuations had stalled. It cited World Health Organization figures that more than 15,000 people in Gaza were still waiting for medical evacuation, and said hospitals faced shortages including IV fluids, anesthetics, surgical supplies and oxygen.⁷

The Independent reported that just 19 of Gaza’s 36 hospitals were partially functioning and that the World Health Organization had recorded 56 attacks on health care this year, causing 10 deaths and 49 injuries.⁶

Civilian toll continues under nominal truce

The Health Ministry’s daily report said 10 deaths and 65 injuries were brought to hospitals across Gaza in the 24 hours before Oct. 10, including one person who died of previous wounds. It also said 836 bodies had been recovered since the ceasefire began.⁴

The ministry does not distinguish between civilians and militants in its overall toll. AP has reported that the ministry, part of the Hamas-run government, keeps detailed records and is considered generally reliable by U.N. agencies and independent experts. It says women and children account for around half the dead.¹

Israel says its post-ceasefire strikes have targeted militants, people approaching restricted zones or those involved in the Oct. 7, 2023, attack. Palestinian officials and aid groups say civilians continue to be killed and injured, and that the security environment prevents meaningful recovery.¹²

The ceasefire’s first year leaves negotiators with a narrow but consequential reality: the hostage issue that drove the first phase has largely closed, but the system meant to replace war has not emerged. As long as each side uses the other’s unmet obligation to justify withholding its own, the ceasefire may continue to limit full-scale war without producing the political, security or humanitarian transition it promised.