The Israel-Gaza conflict is one of the ageless and intense conflicts that have characterized today’s world diplomacy and diplomacy-making, and recently an advancement was made in how to handle this conflict when leaders agreed to introduce a ceasefire. This comes after months of vigorous diplomacy with US President Joe Biden directly pressuring Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu into negotiations on the de-escalation. The Gaza ceasefire is expected to be embarked upon by Israel’s Security Cabinet to put an end to days of complete mayhem that have seen residents being buried under debris and the world turning its back on Israel.
Background of the Recent Escalation
The latest bout of violence followed rising tensions over the Israeli authorities’ restrictions in East Jerusalem and historical animosities between the Israelis and Palestinians. It escalated very fast to massive bombings of Gaza and firing rockets into Israel, causing many losses of lives and properties. Local and international human rights organizations have estimated that several hundred civilians, including women and children, have been killed in Gaza, while Israeli cities suffered repeated rocket attacks that claimed lives and resulted in injuries.
The impact of violence on humanitarians has been very severe. It strained an already weak and blockaded infrastructure in Gaza to its limit. Hospitals have been destroyed, schools and residential places flooded, and thousands of people left homeless and at risk. On the other side, the normal life of Israeli communities living in the neighbourhood of the Gaza strip has been nothing but a living hell as rocket attacks disrupt lives and bring death to citizens.
Biden’s Role in Ceasefire Efforts
Currently, President Biden has a critical role in brokering the ceasefire in Gaza. Despite continuing to support Israel’s right to self-defense, as the US has historically done, Biden supposedly ratcheted up diplomatic pressure on Netanyahu to accept a pause in fighting. Through his leadership of the administration, a long series of phone conferences with the leaders of Israel and the region focused on the importance of cessation of violence.
In his speeches, Biden also maintained the realism of a two-state solution as the only possible solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He also highlighted the need to focus on the humanitarian situation in Gaza and said that more money would be provided to reconstruct the area for Palestinians living there.
The Security Cabinet’s Approval
Israel’s Security Cabinet met as international and Israeli figures called for a ceasefire amid escalating violence. The passing of the ceasefire agreement was therefore an endorsement of a general sentiment within the Cabinet that had indeed secured the military goals of the state through fighting and more war was not warranted. The deal was facilitated by Egypt and other stakeholders, which have always acted as mediators during Israeli-Palestinian conflicts.
There are still only a few details known about the ceasefire; however, it is said that it was worked together with measures that make both sides stop all the hostilities between them. However, the lack of such accommodations makes these agreements look more like temporary arrangements whose sustainability is questionable given the lack of other structures that can help resolve fundamental conflicts.
Reactions from Both Sides
People have reacted differently toward the announcement of a ceasefire in the Gaza conflict. People in Gaza received the stoppage of airstrikes, but with mixed feelings that primarily contain some form of disbelief due to the warzone environment they experience. Some of them called for a lasting solution that should address the issue of their rights and the closure of the borders by Israel and Egypt, respectively.
As in other countries, the response in Israel has likewise been mixed. Some supported the decision of the government to pull back, saying there is a need to protect civilians and avoid further disruption of civil liberties. Some others opposed the decision, saying it may make Hamas more aggressive and does not guarantee lasting peace in Israel.
Challenges Ahead
While the ceasefire is good news in the short term, the long-term source of the conflict remains untouched. It is important to underline that the conflict at the heart of the Middle East, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, is multifaceted and still based on historical experiences, territorial possession, and putative national identities. Thus, there is no real peace process; any tensions that would exist increase these tensions, and cyclical escalations are nearly predestined.
This is the case with Gaza, where the subject that dominated the previous sections is now reconstruction and humanitarian concern. There are numerous examples; the United Nations, as well as various non-governmental organizations, have demanded that the help for the territory’s residents is necessary immediately. However, it became explicitly clear that a major challenge will be how this aid gets to the intended needy people without coming into the hands of the militant groups.
On the political front, both Israeli and Palestinian leaderships are experiencing pressures from within. Netanyahu, whose political position was rather questionable due to the ongoing trials on corruption, has to face nationalist censure besides that of the centrist liberals. On the other hand, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas experiences more marginalization than ever before, and people are wondering about the role he plays in achieving the goals of the Palestinian people.
The Role of International Community
Strengthening and stabilising the Gaza ceasefire and maintaining peace will not be possible without the intervention of the international community. They will have to carry on political dialogues at top levels, hold political and economic forums and negotiations with both parties, provide humanitarian support, and develop means by which it can directly support the two warring sides to have their needs met.
For any resolution of the conflict in the Middle Eastern territory, basic fundamental factors inclusive of the status of the city of Jerusalem, the rights of the refugees, and the boundary of the prospective Palestinian state must be considered. Of course, these are oddities; however, the alternative, continuous bloodletting, is not an option.
Conclusion
The Gaza ceasefire would serve as the first break in an unstable and deadly conflict. But it is only an interim arrangement in a conflict that requires solutions, which are all round. While the big players like Biden and Netanyahu are attempting to make sense of all this, the rest of the world must not allow itself to lose sight of the fact that its goal is to create sustainable peace and reduce human suffering. The idea of getting a respectable and lasting solution can only become realities through steady interaction, bargaining, and give and take.