Ceasefire in name, war in fact: The greatest deal or the oldest trick?
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
In Gaza, the word “ceasefire” feels more like a loophole than a real promise. The 10 October truce, hailed by Washington as a “turning point” was never designed to stop the bloodshed. While in practice it functioned as a calculated break, a short interval that allowed Israel to regroup, re-arm and resume its mass killing campaign with the full backing of the US.
The playbook was all too familiar: announce a hiatus, collect the PR points and then pick up right where things left off with the same objectives and impunity. Only this time, it comes with the package of having played the “peace” card.
The deal was never about peace in the first place. It was literally a hostage swap disguised as diplomacy. President Trump might seem to help broker the deal but its main goal actually was the return of Israeli captives not the protection of Palestinian lives.
Even Trump made it clear that Israel would be “free to act” once the exchanges were complete, signalling that military operations could resume with zero consequences. Obviously, this was all part of a bigger game plan being played out between Washington and Tel Aviv.
And the game plan unfolded exactly as expected. Just days into the truce, explosions in Rafah shattered the pause. Israel as usual, immediately blamed Hamas for violating the agreement and resumed its strikes. Instead of re-assessing the situation, Trump insisted the ceasefire was still “in effect”—a rhetorical move that swept the renewed brutality under the rug and allowed Israel to continue its offensive, all while the US maintained the illusion of diplomacy.
This is the reality Palestinians face: a world where pauses are rebranded as progress and impunity is re-labelled as immunity. The ceasefire was never a commitment to peace; it was a strategic pause that allowed the violence to continue under a different name with a different justification.
The US was not just a silent bystander in this repackaging but rather a manager of the brand itself. While Israel again treated the ceasefire as a pit stop, Washington did nothing to challenge that view. If anything, it helped to sell the illusion of restraint while its “little brother” kept stretching the limits of what a truce is supposed to mean.
READ: WHO: Rebuilding Gaza’s health system likely to cost 7$ billion
Under Trump, the priorities could not have been more transparent. At a summit after the initial hostage exchange, he applauded the Gaza ceasefire as “the greatest deal of them all,” celebrating the return of Israeli captives while ignoring the broader question of peace. His framing was not just tone-deaf but revealing.
Clearly, the primary concern here was solely Israeli lives, never about Palestinian survival and suffering. Trump’s message to his partner in crime, Netanyahu was loud and clear: as long as the hostages were returned, military aggression would face no serious pushback.
Moreover, the rhetoric must match the reality on the ground. Calling this fragile ceasefire just a “pause” between attacks is not being cynical—it is just stating the obvious. Saying Washington’s complicity is not a wild accusation either; when you cover for violations with diplomatic spin, you are part of the problem.
It is totally ridiculous to claim a ceasefire is still “in effect” when bombs keep dropping all over Gaza. What is more, blaming “rebels within Hamas” for every breach without any single shred of proof is just a cheap old trick played and recycled again and again to divert the world’s attention from Israel’s ongoing relentless genocidal campaign.
Trump must stop acting like ceasefires are just for show and start treating them as serious commitments. That means enforceable terms, independent monitoring and actual punishment that are not subject to political shielding. A ceasefire should not be a PR tool—it should be a binding agreement that protects civilians and holds the violator, none other than the Zionist regime to pay the price.
For Palestinians in Gaza, the truth could not be more obvious. That ceasefire? It was a mere gimmick—gone almost as soon as it began. What came next was more of the same or even worse: chaos, grief and the dream of self-determination pushed even further out of reach.
A ceasefire that jumps right back into war is not a ceasefire—it is a dirty tactic. This whole thing is not about finding peace but totally about keeping control. Unless the international community starts holding Tel Aviv and its powerful enabler, Washington, accountable, these so-called peace deals will keep being empty gestures.
Gaza does not need another “pause” dressed up as progress. It needs real, lasting peace—not another round of diplomatic theatre.
OPINION: Bolivia after the elections: How the rise of the right could reframe the Palestinian cause
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
