A bold reality check: the Gaza ceasefire relies on a credible withdrawal and international stabilisation, yet the path forward remains unsettled. Qatar and Egypt, the guarantors of the pause, urged on Saturday that Israeli forces must pull back and that an international stabilisation mission should be deployed as the next essential steps to fully implement the fragile agreement.
These measures are laid out in the peace plan backed by the United States and the United Nations. While the current truce has substantially reduced the fighting, the parties have not agreed on how to advance beyond the first phase. The initial steps called for Israeli troops to retreat behind a defined “yellow line” inside Gaza, while Hamas released the remaining hostages it held and handed over the bodies of all but one of the deceased.
“Now is the critical moment. A ceasefire cannot be completed unless there is a full Israeli withdrawal and stability returns to Gaza,” said Qatar’s prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, speaking at the Doha Forum.
Alongside Egypt and the United States, Qatar helped broker a hard-fought, but still delicately balanced, truce. Both Israel and Hamas have accused each other of violating its terms, leaving key questions about how to implement the plan’s second phase.
A central dispute concerns Hamas’s disarmament. The 20-point plan, first outlined during the Trump administration, would allow Hamas members who disarm to leave Gaza, but Hamas has repeatedly rejected this condition.
Hamas stated on Saturday that it is prepared to place its weapons under Palestinian Authority control once the Israeli occupation ends. “Our weapons are tied to the occupation and aggression,” said Khalil al-Hayya, Hamas’s chief negotiator. “If the occupation ends, these weapons will fall under the state’s authority.”
Under the UN-endorsed framework from November, Israel would withdraw, Gaza would be managed by a transitional governing body known as the “Board of Peace,” and an international stabilisation force would be deployed.
Egypt’s foreign minister, Badr Abdelatty, emphasized at the Doha Forum that the stabilisation force should be deployed promptly because daily ceasefire violations by Israel continue. The Egyptian foreign ministry noted a meeting between Abdelatty and Sheikh Mohammed, underscoring the importance of sustaining efforts to implement the agreement.
While some Arab and Muslim states have been reluctant to participate in the stabilisation force—concerns about potential clashes with Palestinian militants persist—conversations about who would contribute and how command would be structured continue. Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said discussions are ongoing, with the aim of separating Palestinians from Israelis as a preliminary goal.
Abdelatty echoed the idea of deploying the force along the yellow line to verify and monitor the truce. Notably, there have been deadly incidents near the line since the ceasefire began.
Turkey, another guarantor, has signaled interest in joining the stabilisation mission, though Israel has viewed this with concern. In a broader strategic context, the plan’s success hinges on coordinated international intervention and credible enforcement mechanisms.
Fidan argued that Hamas’s disarmament should not be treated as the top priority, urging realism and orderly sequencing. He also urged U.S. engagement with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to advance the plan, warning that without intervention there is a real risk of failure amid ongoing ceasefire violations.
Sheikh Mohammed framed the Guarantors’ stance as a push to move into the next phase, while also seeking a lasting, just solution for both sides. The plan envisions reopening Rafah crossing with Egypt to allow aid into Gaza; Israel has signaled openness to the crossing but only for outbound movement of Gaza residents, a position Egypt rejected as insufficient and insisted on comprehensive, two-way access.
Israel’s stance has prompted alarm among several Muslim-majority nations, who oppose moves that could displace Palestinians. Abdelatty clarified that Rafah should serve as an entry point for aid, not a channel for displacement, reaffirming that the crossing is not to be a gateway for dispossession but for humanitarian relief.
