COMMENT

Gaza's ashes and the illusion of victory

Israel-Hamas ceasefire brings devastation, dashed hopes, and a fractured future

Last updated:
4 MIN READ
This aerial view shows war-devastated Jabalia in the northern Gaza Strip on January 19, 2025, shortly before a ceasefire deal in the war between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas was implemented.
This aerial view shows war-devastated Jabalia in the northern Gaza Strip on January 19, 2025, shortly before a ceasefire deal in the war between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas was implemented.
AFP

The outcome of Gaza ceasefire seems more like grey smoke than white, signalling a compromise born out of the horrific bloodshed and massive devastation in Gaza.

The key elements of the ceasefire deal include the removal of Hamas from power in Gaza, assurances of personal security for its remaining leaders, and the establishment of a neutral force to govern the territory. Additionally, the agreement allows for the continued presence of Israeli military forces and entails the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza in exchange for the release of some Palestinian prisoners outside Palestinian territories.

Britain, with its historical familiarity with the Middle East, appears to have opted for a diplomatic gesture, with its seasoned foreign minister declaring: “We are considering recognising the state of Palestine.”

The essence of the idea presented in that piece is that the leaked outline of the plan proposed a truce of two months or more between the conflicting parties.

Towards the end of this period, or shortly after, senior Hamas military leaders and commanders would leave the Gaza Strip for a safe haven, likely in a geographically distant nations Several countries were reportedly suggested to host them. This scenario would resemble the departure of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat from Lebanon, though on a less dramatic scale.

The plan also stipulated that Hamas would be barred from any form of political or military activity in the Gaza Strip. In the transitional phase, the administration of Gaza would be handed over to a joint authority, potentially involving participation from neighbouring Arab countries.

The third phase, following the transitional period, involves the declaration of the State of Palestine, encompassing the territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This would be based on the general framework established in the Oslo Accords, albeit with certain modifications. This phase is expected to be accompanied by broader Arab recognition of Israel.

This is exactly what was published in the article a little over 11 months ago. At the time, the death toll in Gaza had not yet reached 20,000, and most of Gaza’s cities remained largely intact. There was no clear strategy for learning from a conflict that had already dragged on for four months. The proposed solutions were met with hesitation, relying on the so-called axis of resistance, which ultimately proved to be ineffective.

The bitter and unequal conflict continued, leaving tens of thousands dead, including some senior Hamas leaders in Beirut, Gaza, and even Tehran. Lebanon and Hezbollah reached a grim conclusion, while Syria experienced dramatic shifts, culminating in the fall of Bashar Al Assad’s regime. Gaza is reduced to rubble and left in ruins, with devastation overwhelming its residents.

More critically, what was once on the negotiation table is no longer feasible. Hamas’ survival as a political entity in Gaza is now untenable. The prospect of Israel withdrawing from Gaza, or even from significant parts of it, is no longer being considered.

Furthermore, the international momentum for the establishment of a Palestinian state has evaporated. Adding to this grim scenario, Palestinians in the West Bank now face the threat of expanded Israeli control, while internal divisions and fratricidal conflict among Palestinians continue to deepen and intensify.

Lost opportunities

This phenomenon stems from an intellectual deficit marked by the supremacy of ideology over reality, a severe lack of political imagination, and a fundamental misjudgement of the enemy’s capabilities.

Instead of relying on knowledge, there was a tendency to be driven by emotional, politically charged rhetoric. Furthermore, there is a lack of open, internal dialogue on how to confront or negotiate effectively.

The people of Gaza will inherit a fractured and geographically incomplete Gaza, without Hamas’s control. Yet, we will still hear those who claim “victory”.

Mohammad Alrumaihi is an author and Professor of Political Sociology at Kuwait University

Sign up for the Daily Briefing

Get the latest news and updates straight to your inbox

Up Next