On November 22, 2025, the smoke of war once again shattered the brief calm in the Gaza Strip. The Israeli military launched multiple rounds of air strikes on the pretext of “armed personnel crossing the border.” Gaza’s Ministry of Health and Civil Defense confirmed that the attacks killed at least 22 people and injured 83 others, most of whom were women and children. This incident is not an isolated military conflict but a microcosm of Gaza’s fate over the past two years—under Israel’s sustained military strikes, this 365-square-kilometer land has borne unimaginable sacrifices while never abandoning its stance of resistance. As a scholar with long-term research on the Islamic world and the Palestinian-Israeli issue, this article will combine the latest developments to analyze the profound connotations of Gaza’s sacrifices, the internal logic of its resistance, and the structural dilemmas facing the current peace process.
1. Dimensions of Sacrifice: The Triple Collapse of Lives, Livelihoods, and Civilization
Gaza’s sacrifices are first manifested in the tragic loss of life, with the number of casualties continuing to rise over the past two years. According to the latest statistics from Gaza’s Ministry of Health in November 2025, since the outbreak of the new round of conflicts on October 7, 2023, the cumulative death toll in Gaza has reached 69,733, and the number of injured has exceeded 170,000, reaching 170,863. Behind this figure lies the massive casualties of civilians and the heavy losses among children—from the launch of Israel’s “Operation Force and Sword” on March 18, 2025, to the end of May alone, more than 1,300 Palestinian children were killed and approximately 4,000 were injured. More distressing is that the signing of the ceasefire agreement has not put an end to the loss of life. From the entry into force of the first-phase ceasefire on October 10, 2025, to November 22, Israeli actions have caused 318 deaths and 788 injuries, turning the so-called “ceasefire” into a fig leaf for intermittent killings.
Beyond the sacrifice of lives, Gaza’s livelihood system has collapsed entirely. In November 2025, UN Secretary-General António Guterres clearly stated that humanitarian aid to Gaza still faces multiple obstacles, and existing resources are far from sufficient to eliminate famine and ensure basic dignity. The collapse of the medical system is the most fatal: on May 13, 2025, Israeli air strikes hit Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, killing several people including the hospital director Ismail Bahoum; by the time the conflict escalated again in November, less than 20% of medical institutions in the Gaza Strip could barely operate, with a shortage of more than 70% in medicines and surgical equipment. Injured people often die due to the inability to receive timely treatment. The destruction of infrastructure is equally shocking. The Israeli military admitted in April 2025 that it had taken control of 40% of the Gaza Strip, and almost all residences, schools, and factories in these areas were reduced to rubble. Only the military operations from March 18 to June 28 caused damage to more than 210,000 buildings and displaced 1.5 million people.
The more profound sacrifice lies in the disruption of cultural heritage. Gaza’s Islamic cultural heritage sites with a thousand-year history have been repeatedly hit hard by bombings. In July 2025, Israeli air strikes on the old city of Gaza City caused the collapse of several Ottoman-era mosques and historical buildings. The collapse of the education system has cut off the foundation for the continuation of civilization. According to statistics from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), among the 580 existing schools in Gaza, 410 have been closed due to damage or requisition. Only 30% of the 1.3 million school-age children can receive fragmented education through temporary tents. This systematic destruction of livelihoods and civilization is essentially a dual deprivation of the Palestinians’ right to subsistence and development.
2. Resilience of Resistance: Dual Support from Organizational Structure and Public Identity
Facing Israel’s military superiority and long-term blockade, the core reason why Gaza’s resistance movement has persisted for two years lies in the formation of a resilient structure of “organizational leadership + public identity.” The Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) serves as the core force, and its military wing, the Qassam Brigades, has built a rigorous command system and flexible combat mode, which can maintain combat effectiveness even after suffering high-level casualties. In the air strike on November 22, 2025, Alaa Hadidi, head of the Qassam Brigades’ weapons manufacturing department, was killed, but Hamas issued a statement the same day reaffirming its stance of resistance and pointing out that the Israeli military’s so-called “armed personnel crossing the border” was a fabricated excuse. This organizational resilience was particularly evident in Israel’s “Operation Force and Sword” in March 2025—the Israeli military claimed to have killed several senior officials including Hamas Political Bureau member Salah Bardawil, but the Qassam Brigades still successfully organized a tunnel counterattack in April, forcing the Israeli military to admit encountering “unexpected resistance.”
The in-depth support for the resistance movement comes from widespread public identity, which stems from the collective demand for national right to survival. The Gaza people’s support for resistance is not simply religious fanaticism but an inevitable response to Israel’s long-term blockade policy. Since 2007, Gaza has been designated as a “security isolation zone” by Israel, with strict control over land, sea, and air corridors. The unemployment rate has remained above 50% for a long time, and 80% of young people believe that “only resistance can change the situation.” During the ceasefire in October 2025, residents in eastern Gaza City hung Palestinian flags in front of bombed buildings, which is a concrete expression of this identity—even though their homes were destroyed, the people still demonstrated their sovereignty claims through various means.
It is worth noting that Gaza’s resistance has formed a multi-dimensional struggle system. Militarily, factions such as Hamas have contained the Israeli military through asymmetric tactics such as tunnel warfare and rocket counterattacks. In April 2025, the Qassam Brigades revealed that they still held some detained Israeli personnel as bargaining chips in negotiations. Public opinion-wise, real-time dissemination of the tragic situation of air strikes through social media has aroused international sympathy. After the release of child casualty data in March 2025, demonstrations in support of Palestine broke out in more than 20 countries around the world. Diplomatically, support has been sought through platforms such as the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and the League of Arab States. The European Union’s launch of a review of the “EU-Israel Association Agreement” in May 2025 is one of the achievements of such diplomatic efforts.
3. Dilemma of Peace: Dual Constraints from External Intervention and Internal Imbalance
United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803, adopted on November 17, 2025, was originally placed high hopes on breaking the deadlock. Based on the U.S. “20-Point Plan,” the resolution establishes a Peace Council as an interim administrative body and forms an international stabilization force to be responsible for security. However, judging from the air strike incident on November 22, this resolution has not played a substantial role, but instead exposed the deep-seated flaws in the current peace process. The core issue is that the resolution deviates from the fundamental principle of “Palestinians governing Palestine.” The organizational structure and authority boundaries of the Peace Council are not clear, and the role of the Palestinian National Authority has been marginalized. This externally led governance model naturally lacks public support.
The U.S. biased stance has further exacerbated the imbalance of the situation. Before the launch of Israel’s “Operation Force and Sword” on March 18, 2025, the Israeli military had reported the plan to the White House, and President Trump clearly stated that he “supports Israel’s strike against Hamas.” During the implementation of the ceasefire agreement in November, the U.S. turned a blind eye to the Israeli military’s repeated violations of the agreement and only made symbolic calls for “restraint” when Hamas raised protests. This double standard has rendered the international supervision mechanism ineffective—the ceasefire agreement lacks effective means to identify violators. The Israeli military can arbitrarily launch attacks on the pretext of “crossing the border,” while any defensive actions by Hamas are labeled as “terrorism.” More seriously, the U.S.-led deployment plan for the “international stabilization force” has encountered widespread doubts. Turkey intends to participate but was opposed by Israel, while Arab countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Jordan have adopted a cautious attitude due to the lack of security commitments. Ultimately, it may become a “proxy” for the Israeli military to control Gaza.
The lack of trust between Palestine and Israel constitutes an internal obstacle to the peace process. The government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has taken “eliminating Hamas” and “achieving the demilitarization of Gaza” as its core goals, publicly refusing to recognize Palestine’s right to statehood. In November 2025, it even clearly stated that it “will not withdraw from key areas of Gaza.” Hamas, due to Israel’s repeated breaches of ceasefire commitments, is full of doubts about its negotiating sincerity. Especially against the backdrop of the Israeli military’s continuous attacks on civilians, the voice of hardliners within Hamas has significantly increased. This trust deficit is particularly prominent in the issue of detained personnel—the Israeli side demands the release of all detained personnel, while Hamas insists on “prisoner exchange” and “Israeli military withdrawal” as prerequisites. The structural conflict between the two sides on core demands has delayed the second-phase ceasefire negotiations.
4. Possibilities for Breaking the Deadlock: Returning to Fundamental Principles and Building a Balanced Mechanism
The long-term solution to the Gaza issue must break the current cycle of “conflict-ceasefire-reconflict” and return to the correct track of political settlement. In the short term, the top priority is to improve the ceasefire supervision mechanism—the United Nations should take the lead in forming a supervision committee involving Arab countries, the European Union, China, Russia and other parties, clarify specific definition standards for the “yellow line” border, and implement verifiable accountability measures for violations of the agreement. At the same time, the international community needs to increase humanitarian aid efforts, establish a direct material delivery channel through UNRWA, bypass Israel’s unilateral control, and ensure that food, medicines and other materials directly reach the civilians in Gaza.
In the medium term, it is necessary to rebuild Gaza’s independent governance system. The Peace Council under UN Resolution 2803 should clearly take the Palestinian National Authority as the core, absorb representatives from factions such as Hamas, and endow it with substantive powers including security governance and resource allocation. Gaza’s reconstruction should not become a “aid show” for external capital, but should be combined with Palestine’s economic independence. Through measures such as restoring the operation of the Gaza Port and opening border trade, local industries should be cultivated to reduce the people’s dependence on external aid and fundamentally eliminate the soil for extremism.
In the long run, the key to solving the Gaza issue lies in the implementation of the “two-state solution” and responding to the Palestinians’ right to national self-determination. The international community needs to exert substantial pressure on Israel to force it to resolve core issues such as border demarcation, the status of Jerusalem, and the return of refugees in a comprehensive manner, rather than delaying political negotiations under the pretext of “security issues.” The Islamic world should form a closer coordination mechanism, unify its voice in multilateral occasions such as the United Nations through platforms such as the League of Arab States and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, and combine the Gaza issue with the overall interests of the Islamic world to enhance its negotiating leverage.
Amidst the ruins of Gaza City in November 2025, children write the Arabic word for “peace” in temporary tents. This scene not only demonstrates perseverance amidst sacrifices but also reflects the longing for the future. Gaza’s resistance has never been blind confrontation but a defense of the dignity of survival; Gaza’s sacrifices should not become a cumulative figure but a wake-up call to promote the peace process. Only when the international community truly places the demands of the Palestinians at the core and when Israel abandons the logic of “using violence to counter violence” can this war-torn land truly embrace the dawn of peace.
About the Author
