listen to this article5 minutes
information
In the devastated enclave, where more than two million Palestinians remain crammed onto a shrinking land under the overwhelming shadow of Israeli military occupation and shelling, daily survival is tied to a fragile October ceasefire.
But as Israeli and American bombs rain down on Iran and it retaliates across the region, the broken ceasefire is at a breaking point, calling for an unprecedented diplomatic maneuver between President Donald Trump’s Peace Committee and Hamas in direct dialogue.
Recommended stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
Special envoys from a new group personally led by President Trump to oversee the post-war Gaza Strip met with Hamas representatives in the Egyptian capital over the weekend, Reuters reported.
The meeting aimed to uphold a “ceasefire” that has come under increasing tension since the regional war began on February 28.
After the talks, Israel announced on Wednesday it would partially reopen the Rafah border crossing between Gaza and Egypt. The crossing, Gaza’s only pedestrian lifeline outside of Israel’s direct control, was closed when the Iranian offensive began.
Despite diplomatic pressure, violence in the enclave continues. Israeli airstrikes on Sunday killed at least 13 Palestinians, including two boys, a pregnant woman and nine police officers, a stark reminder of Israel’s total military control of the territory.
A pragmatic shift or a tactical ploy?
While the talks mark a notable commitment by the US government, analysts see the move as a calculated tactic backed by threats of new violence rather than legitimization of Palestinian groups.
Palestinian political analyst Abdullah Akrabawi said Washington’s willingness to hold talks with Hamas reflects the harsh reality on the ground. “There is a comprehensive and real recognition that the military, political and social actor in the Gaza Strip is Hamas,” Akrabawi told Al Jazeera.
But he cautioned against viewing the meeting as a fundamental shift in U.S. policy. In the era of the Trump administration, diplomatic talks do not equate to political recognition. Rather, Akrabawi argued, this approach is framed by the constant threat of returning to a “war of annihilation.”
He explained that the ultimate goal of these talks is to empower Gaza’s newly established technocratic committee and build a social infrastructure capable of countering armed groups.
The illusion of “reverse intimidation”
Initial reports said Hamas had threatened to break the ceasefire if restrictions on the Gaza border continued, and reportedly sought to exploit the regional turmoil caused by the Iran war to force Israel’s release.
Mr. Akrabawi rejected this assessment, noting that Hamas has consistently stated that it wants to avoid a return to full-scale war. He said that rather than being a successful pressure campaign on the Palestinians, reopening the Rafah border serves another strategic purpose for Washington and Tel Aviv.
“All facilities, whether crossing the Rafah border or allowing aid to enter the country, will be provided through the Peace Committee and the new technical committee established in the Gaza Strip,” Akrabawi said. “This is not a negotiation or a response to Palestinian pressure, but rather in the context of allowing this commission to penetrate Palestinian society.”
He added that the aim is to establish a security infrastructure that will allow the disarmament of resistance groups, even if it leads to a civil war within Palestine.
Disarmament and the 20-point plan
Prior to the regional escalation, President Trump’s flagship Middle East initiative, the 20-point plan for Gaza, had partially halted the genocide and secured the release of Israeli prisoners of war and some Palestinian prisoners. In return, Hamas accepted a ceasefire in which Israeli forces remained in control of more than half of the enclave.
But the second phase of President Trump’s plan, which depends on Hamas giving up its arms in exchange for amnesty and rehabilitation, remains stalled. While some might think that regional conflicts would have given Hamas the leverage to remove disarmament provisions altogether, Akrabawi suggested the opposite was happening.
The United States and Israel, which are deeply involved in Iran, are likely to increase pressure on Palestinian groups to secure a swift and forceful victory in Gaza. “The pressure that is occurring today on the occupying government and America’s view of war with Iran may put pressure on Hamas to accomplish this mission as soon as possible,” Akrabawi said.
Still, Hamas remains resolute. The group considers weapons essential to resisting the occupation and forming the basis of a future Palestinian security institution.
While Washington and Tel Aviv are trying to use the fear of a new massacre to shape Gaza’s political future, the reality of Palestinians trapped in the enclave remains unchanged. For them, the partial reopening of a single border crossing is not a diplomatic breakthrough but a fleeting suffocation in the besieged Gaza Strip, where daily survival is held hostage by the demands of military occupation.
