Donald Trump's sudden announcement that Israel has accepted the necessary conditions for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza sparked a wave of cautious optimism. In his statement, Trump emphasised, in particular, the key roles of Qatar and Egypt in the mediation and announced that a response from Hamas was expected "a few days" before the ceasefire begins.
According to the draft agreement, Israel would suspend all military operations in Gaza for 60 days. In the first week, 28 Israeli hostages — alive and dead — would be released in exchange for 1,236 Palestinian prisoners and the remains of 180 Palestinians.
The humanitarian side of the agreement provides for the release of up to 600 trucks of aid for Gaza per day, of which 50 trucks are reserved for fuel and medical supplies.
In practice, the UN has so far managed to deliver only about 200 shipments in 12 days, and there have been calls for an urgent increase in funding to reach the targeted capacity.
During this period, the UN, the International Red Cross and other humanitarian organisations would take over the coordination of distribution, with logistical support from Qatar and Egypt to avoid chaos and deadly incidents at distribution points with the now criticised system.
A framework that could last
The diplomatic U-turn comes after months of the heaviest fighting in Gaza since the war began. According to estimates from UN organisations, the number of Palestinian deaths has exceeded 50,000, while hundreds of thousands have been displaced without basic living conditions.
In recent weeks, Israeli forces have stepped up their bombardment of northern Gaza and Khan Younis, targeting the allegedly remaining Hamas strongholds.
On the other hand, missile attacks from Gaza have not ceased, and the situation has been further complicated by attacks on Israeli targets by the pro-Iranian Houthis from Yemen, opening up a new regional dimension to the conflict.
Despite the harsh reality of war, Trump insists that this is the most realistic chance to end hostilities and enter the phase of negotiating a lasting political solution. In recent months, his team has mediated several secret rounds of negotiations in Cairo and Doha.
According to information from diplomatic sources, Israel has agreed to this framework mainly due to the exhaustion of the army and increasing international pressure. Domestic political reasons should not be neglected either, as the Israeli government has been criticised for the high human and economic costs of the war.
The combination of these interests and American pressure has created a framework that could last for at least the next two months
On the other hand, Hamas has not yet publicly confirmed that it accepts the proposal. Its representatives point out that a lasting solution would have to include the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza and the lifting of the blockade that has been in place for more than 15 years.
For now, they have indicated that they are prepared to "seriously consider" the agreement. However, they fear that Israel could use the ceasefire to consolidate its positions and resume operations as soon as the opportunity arises.
The roles of Qatar and Egypt should be highlighted. Doha has direct channels to the political leadership of Hamas and is crucial to the delivery of the guarantees offered by Israel and the US.
Egypt is the traditional mediator in all crises in Gaza, and has a strategic interest in preventing the conflicts from spilling over to the Sinai and destabilising its security structures.
The combination of these interests and American pressure has created a framework that could last for at least the next two months.
The humanitarian issue far outweighs all others
The humanitarian issue within this agreement far outweighs all other issues. The plan calls for at least 600 trucks to deliver food, medicine, and fuel to hospitals every day.
The distribution of aid so far has proved disastrous – on several occasions, there have been riots and shootings as civilians tried to receive food, with dozens of people dying in just one day. Organisations such as the Red Crescent, UNRWA, and WHO have called for the urgent establishment of a transparent and secure system to ensure aid reaches those who need it most.
The previous agreement on a 42-day ceasefire failed because the provisions for withdrawing Israeli units were not met
However, there are still many challenges that can threaten everything. There are still militant groups on the ground that are not under the direct command of Hamas and could provoke an incident by attacking Israeli targets.
Likewise, the Israeli forces have already stressed that they will respond to any attempt of a missile attack regardless of the agreement. This creates room for chain reactions and a possible collapse of the ceasefire in the first few weeks.
The previous agreement on a 42-day ceasefire failed in March because the provisions for withdrawing Israeli units were not met, which also supports a pessimistic outlook.
Two months that could change the course of the conflict
The US and Donald Trump are investing a lot of political capital in this initiative because they want to show global leadership in the Middle East. Trump is trying to reverse the image of America withdrawing from regional conflicts and show that it can deliver where Europe and the United Nations have failed.
In this context, it cannot be ruled out that the White House will exert additional pressure on both sides by pledging economic aid for the Gaza Strip and also by guaranteeing security co-operation with Israel.
For Israel, this would be an opportunity to show that it is prepared to compromise but without giving up the goal of never again allowing Hamas to threaten its territory - Benjamin Netanyahu
If the agreement survives the first month, the path will be clear for a more ambitious peace plan that includes long-term guarantees and perhaps some kind of international monitoring mechanism.
Otherwise, the world could witness an even more devastating cycle of violence. A collapse of the ceasefire could have even more serious consequences than if it had not existed at all, as any new diplomatic initiative would lose credibility.
The key now is whether Hamas will be willing to accept the agreement, which is the only chance to save the population of Gaza from further destruction and to find a way out of the humanitarian catastrophe.
For Israel, this would be an opportunity to show the national and international public that it is prepared to compromise but without giving up the goal of never again allowing Hamas to threaten its territory.
All actors know that this may be their last chance to stop the spiral that threatens to drag the entire region into war. If the mediators succeed in ensuring strict compliance with the agreement and monitoring the ceasefire, the next two months could change the course of the conflict in the direction of de-escalation.
If they fail, it will be another inglorious attempt to restore order in the Middle East, and the cost of failure will again be measured in thousands of lives lost.
