Executive Summary
Seven months after the October 2025 ceasefire, Gaza’s ceasefire remains in place but progress towards phase two has stalled. The second phase has stalled largely over sequencing: the roadmap requires Hamas to disarm before any Israeli withdrawal, which Hamas rejects. This is a structural problem. Gaza is being treated as a post-conflict disarmament case, yet the conflict remains active and the conditions seen in comparable settlements are absent. With no exchange taking place, Israeli military control is starting to look increasingly entrenched.
Key Points
- Phase one was never fully implemented, yet phase two was announced in January 2026. The ceasefire has held for seven months despite near-daily violations.
- The Board of Peace roadmap requires Hamas to surrender weapons within 250 days and dismantle tunnels and military infrastructure within 90 days before Israeli withdrawal, governance transition or reconstruction can begin. Hamas rejects this sequence and links disarmament to full Israeli withdrawal.
- Israeli forces occupied roughly 53 per cent of Gaza at the Yellow Line, with newer maps adding a restricted zone of about 11 per cent beyond it, bringing the area Israel claims to control toward two thirds. Netanyahu has signalled Israel will keep “overall security responsibility” for an “indefinite period”.
- Israel killed Qassam Brigades head Izz al-Din al-Haddad on 15 May, after the ceasefire. This is making Hamas less willing to compromise rather than weakening it. Hamas has a broad leadership structure and a succession system that allows it to recover.
- The situation in the West Bank is also getting worse, with rising settler violence and stronger Israeli control.
Analysis
The plan treats Gaza as a territory moving from war to peace, where weapons are decommissioned once fighting ends. Gaza is not at that stage. It remains an active conflict, and the conditions seen in comparable disarmament cases are absent. In Northern Ireland, armed groups were included in negotiations under an agreed framework and a shared destination. In Colombia, the FARC disarmed inside a settlement that paired a ceasefire with reintegration and monitoring. Gaza has no settlement, no agreed end-state and no reintegration pathway. Israel and Hamas hold incompatible visions for the territory, so there is no political agreement to implement, only disagreement over the order of steps.
That order of steps is the main obstacle. The roadmap asks Hamas to disarm first, on Israel’s reading of an ambiguous plan, with no guarantee that withdrawal follows. Israeli officials have said disarmament “will happen one way or another” and have prepared plans to resume fighting if it does not. Killing al-Haddad, among the more pragmatic figures in the military wing, may complicate future negotiations over disarmament.
Policy Implications
- The risk of collapse is rising as diplomatic momentum behind the original agreement fades.
- Disarm-first sequencing is unlikely to break under current terms.
- Rebuilding and governance therefore depend on something unlikely to happen, leaving Gulf countries hesitant to provide support.
- The longer phase two stalls, the more Israeli control consolidates.
- Without progress towards a political settlement, the ceasefire risks consolidating a long-term Israeli occupation in Gaza.