In the early morning in the southern Gaza Strip, a civilian car was traveling along a humanitarian aid route when it was suddenly hit by an airstrike, leaving only wreckage and bloodstains. On the same day, the Israeli Defense Forces announced that the driver was a Palestinian militant who had “crossed the line.”
This was just one scene from the airstrikes that hit multiple locations in Gaza on November 22, 2025. Despite the ceasefire agreement taking effect on October 10, violence continues.
01 Ceasefire Amidst Gunfire: Fragile Peace and Ongoing Confrontation
On October 10, 2025, the first phase of the Gaza ceasefire agreement officially took effect, but peace did not arrive as expected.
In a new round of conflict, the Israeli Defense Forces launched multiple airstrikes, citing Hamas violations of the ceasefire agreement, resulting in at least 22 deaths and 83 injuries. The casualties included several women and children.
The Kasam Brigade, the armed wing of Hamas, confirmed that its head of weapons manufacturing, Alaa al-Hadidi, was killed in the airstrikes. The Israeli military stated that these actions were in response to Palestinian militants crossing the “Yellow Line.”
The so-called “Yellow Line” is a withdrawal line drawn by the Israeli military according to the ceasefire agreement. Under the agreement, areas outside the “Yellow Line” remain under Israeli military control, while areas inside are no longer occupied by Israeli forces.
Since the ceasefire, the Israeli military has repeatedly shot and killed Palestinians who crossed the “Yellow Line,” accusing Hamas militants of “crossing the line” to launch attacks.
02 Spiral Escalation: The Logic of Retaliation and Counter-Retaliation
The cycle of retaliation between Israel and Hamas is not new, yet it repeatedly pushes the peace process to the brink.
On October 28, 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the military to carry out a “forceful strike” on the Gaza Strip, citing Hamas violations of the ceasefire agreement.
Netanyahu stated that Hamas’s actions had “crossed a clear red line,” while Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant declared that Hamas would “pay a heavy price.”
Hamas denied any involvement in the incident in a statement, reiterating the group’s commitment to upholding the ceasefire agreement. The organization also pointed out that Israel’s refusal to allow heavy machinery needed for rubble removal into Gaza and its prohibition of Palestinian and international search and rescue teams from entering certain areas had delayed the search for the remains of hostages.
The conflicting parties have fundamentally different interpretations of “violations of the ceasefire agreement.” The Israeli military emphasizes that any “crossing of the line” constitutes a breach of the agreement, while Hamas accuses Israel of ongoing attacks on civilians as the true violation.
03 Structural Dilemma: Deep-Seated Reasons Why the Ceasefire Agreement Fails to Hold
The fragility of the Gaza ceasefire agreement stems from a series of irreconcilable structural contradictions.
The inherent flaws in the “Yellow Line” mechanism are the primary issue. This invisible line divides the control areas of the two sides, but the Gaza Strip is densely populated with blurred boundaries, making it difficult to distinguish between civilians and militants.
Internal factional divisions within Hamas further complicate the implementation of the agreement. In May 2025, Muhammad Sinwar, a senior Hamas military commander in the Gaza Strip, was killed by the Israeli military, weakening the influence of hardliners within Hamas.
The approval of this ceasefire agreement was a joint decision by Hamas’s political bureau leaders abroad and other armed groups in Gaza, made without consulting Hamas leaders within the Gaza Strip.
Domestic political pressure in Israel also constrains the peace process. Israel’s next parliamentary elections are scheduled for October 2026, and Netanyahu fears that if elections proceed as planned, his opponents will exploit the anniversary of Hamas’s three-week attack on Israel for political gain.
04 International Intervention: From Mediation to Taking Sides
International intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict also influences the dynamics of the confrontation.
On November 17, 2025, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 2803, endorsing the U.S.-proposed “20-point plan” to end the conflict in Gaza and authorizing the formation of an international stabilization force for Gaza.
However, this resolution faced opposition from both conflicting parties. Hamas stated that the resolution did not align with “the political and humanitarian demands and rights of the Palestinian people.”
Israel also expressed strong dissatisfaction with the resolution’s clauses related to the establishment of a Palestinian state. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated during a cabinet meeting: “Our position against the establishment of a Palestinian state in any territory remains unchanged.”
The intervention methods of the U.S. Trump administration have also sparked controversy. According to analysis by Israeli media, the Trump administration’s involvement this time is “the most interventionist U.S. engagement in Israeli politics since the 1978 Camp David Accords.”
05 Prospects for Peace: The Path from Temporary Ceasefire to Sustainable Peace
The prospects for peace in the Gaza Strip remain bleak, as temporary ceasefires struggle to evolve into sustainable peace.
The disarmament of Hamas and post-war governance in Gaza are two major unresolved issues. Regarding the “demilitarization” of Gaza in Trump’s “20-point plan,” Mousa Abu Marzouk, a member of Hamas’s political bureau, explicitly stated that they would only hand over their weapons to the Palestinian army after the establishment of a Palestinian state.
As for who will govern Gaza in the future, two widely discussed possibilities are the takeover by the Palestinian National Authority or trusteeship under a so-called “international transitional authority.”
Hamas has expressed willingness to relinquish post-war governance of the Gaza Strip and transfer power to the Palestinians, but it remains unclear whether this means Hamas is willing to transfer power to the Palestinian National Authority.
Israel explicitly opposes this plan. During the war, Netanyahu repeatedly stated that neither Hamas nor the Palestinian National Authority would manage Gaza after the war.
Wang Jin, Director of the Center for International Strategic Studies at Northwest University, pointed out: “Even if the existing ceasefire agreement is implemented in the future, it can only station some ceasefire observers and peacekeeping personnel in the core areas of the Gaza Strip and southern Israel, responsible for certain ceasefire monitoring and report writing, but it will be difficult to go to the front lines to reconstruct the Gaza Strip.”
The conflict in Gaza is like a game with no winners. A Hamas source who wished to remain anonymous admitted: “Despite Israel’s continuous escalation of the conflict, Hamas and other Palestinian factions remain committed to adhering to the ceasefire agreement.”
However, he also expressed concern about the situation: “Israel’s continued killing of Gaza civilians and the U.S. reluctance to pressure Israel to curb its actions may push the situation into chaos.”
A ceasefire agreement is merely a piece of paper; true peace requires both sides to cross that invisible yet very real “Yellow Line.” When violence becomes a habit and retaliation becomes the norm, the children of Gaza can only spend another dawnless night amidst the smoke of conflict.
About the Author
