One Question Looming Over Trump’s Gaza Deal Between Israelis and Palestinians: Why Now?

The long-awaited ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, now being implemented in Gaza, includes significant gains for both sides. Israel will return the remaining hostages, and about 20 of them are believed to be alive, in addition to the bodies of others. In return, it will release about 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, according to reports, end its two-year-old war on Gaza, and withdraw its forces from large parts of the Strip. The Trump administration deserves credit for pushing for an agreement.

But the basic outlines of the agreement have been on the table for months. By accepting it, both sides abandon the main demands. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pledged to destroy Hamas, but the group remains the most powerful actor in Gaza. In return, Hamas wanted a complete Israeli withdrawal and guarantees that Israel would not resume operations, both of which remain uncertain.

The long-awaited ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, now being implemented in Gaza, includes significant gains for both sides. Israel will return the remaining hostages, and about 20 of them are believed to be alive, in addition to the bodies of others. In return, it will release about 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, according to reports, end its two-year-old war on Gaza, and withdraw its forces from large parts of the Strip. The Trump administration deserves credit for pushing for an agreement.

But the basic outlines of the agreement have been on the table for months. By accepting it, both sides abandon the main demands. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has pledged to destroy Hamas, but the group remains the most powerful actor in Gaza. In return, Hamas wanted a complete Israeli withdrawal and guarantees that Israel would not resume operations, both of which remain uncertain.

Why did the two sides agree to something less than their maximum goals? Why now?

Let’s start with Hamas, which has long held on to hostages as a means of pressure. Hamas held hostages when it attacked on October 7, 2023, because it knew that Israel would make major concessions to get them back. In 2011, Israel released more than 1,000 prisoners, most of them Palestinians, in exchange for the release of soldier Gilad Shalit, who was also captured by Hamas. In addition to seeking such huge concessions, Hamas leaders may have been concerned that giving up all the hostages would simply free Israel to launch more aggressive attacks on Gaza.

Increasingly, however, the hostages appeared to be a slender reed for Hamas to cling to. Although their fate is on the minds of many Israelis, this concern has not stopped Israeli military operations. Israel has consistently prioritized killing Hamas leaders and fighters, such as attempting to demolish tunnels, even if doing so endangers the hostages. Its recent incursion deeper and deeper into Gaza City was just the latest indication that the danger to the hostages was not an obstacle. Under the US-brokered agreement, Hamas can at least use the hostages to claim some form of victory, force Israel to withdraw and, in the process, obtain the release of imprisoned Palestinians.

Hamas itself is suffering from two years of fighting against the Israeli juggernaut. Israel has killed several of the group’s top leaders, including Yahya Sinwar, who masterminded the October 7 attack, and has killed or attempted to kill Hamas leaders in Iran, Lebanon, and Qatar — and nowhere appears to be safe. In January, Israel claimed to have killed nearly 20,000 Hamas fighters. There is disagreement about the exact numbers, but the numbers are certainly high. Hamas has recruited new fighters, but they are untrained and less skilled.

Only a few Palestinian families in Gaza were able to escape without any casualties – the death toll exceeded 67,000 last week – and Gaza itself was devastated. The Palestinians there have always wanted the war to end. On the verge of starvation and lack of medical care, Palestinians are subjected to constant displacement due to Israeli military operations. Each additional day of war was excruciating agony, and now, they hoped, food and medicine could flow into Gaza, and the rebuilding process could soon begin.

The Israelis are also exhausted by two years of brutal war. The constant call-up of reserves is straining Israeli families and the country’s economy. Israel lost 466 soldiers, which is a large number compared to previous wars in Gaza. In a recent opinion poll, two-thirds of Israelis favored a ceasefire.

Both sides also faced international pressure. In July, the Arab League called on Hamas to disarm and end its rule in Gaza – and, for the first time, explicitly condemned the October 7 attack. European countries have repeatedly called for a ceasefire and criticized Israeli operations, and Canada, France and the United Kingdom have officially recognized the Palestinian state.

Israel usually ignores European pressure, but it cannot ignore Donald Trump. The US president is politically strong when it comes to Israel. If Joe Biden had pushed Netanyahu to reach an agreement and Netanyahu had resisted, almost all Republicans and some Democrats would have sided with the Israeli leader. When Trump does this, most Democrats agree, and Trump can carry his party with him. Trump is also personalizing politics, and Netanyahu should worry that if he ignores the president, Trump will neither forgive nor forget. Regarding Syria, Yemen, and other regional issues, Trump took positions contradictory to those of Israel.

Trump’s security guarantee for Qatar also plays an important role. Trump was angry when Israel attacked Qatar, a close partner of the United States and a country that has wooed the president himself with gifts such as a luxury 747 jet. By promising to protect Qatar, the United States enables Qatar to serve as a refuge for Hamas members who may be on Israel’s hit list if they remain in Gaza.

For Netanyahu, increased US pressure after the strike on Qatar means it is time to make a decision. In addition to public fatigue and public support for a deal to repatriate the hostages, Netanyahu’s own coalition was already weakening due to a decision last June by the Israeli Supreme Court requiring ultra-Orthodox men to perform military service. Challenging Trump in an increasingly unpopular war was strategically and politically risky for Netanyahu, and since most Israelis recognize the importance of strong ties with the United States, he can cite pressure from Trump as a reason to finally withdraw from the war without losing his credentials among the Israeli right. Netanyahu is also adept at politics, and as Israel enters election season, he can now present himself as the man who destroyed Hamas and Hezbollah and set back the Iranian nuclear program.

The current agreement is a major achievement and an important step forward for both Gaza and Israel, and it will be difficult to make it last. The good news is that some of the factors that contributed to the deal, such as fatigue on both sides and Arab and European pressure, are likely to continue. There are other factors that are more fragile. In order to gain political advantage during election season, Netanyahu may violate the ceasefire — to target a Hamas leader, for example — or hold back on making unpopular concessions, such as releasing a particularly hated Palestinian leader from Israeli prison. Hamas, for its part, may conclude that it cannot risk losing power entirely in Gaza or abandoning its hard-earned credentials as the premier Palestinian resistance movement.

All of this means that the United States must continually coordinate with its partners and pressure all parties to honor the deal — and move to more ambitious steps that include Gaza reconstruction, the return of a non-Hamas government, and progress toward the establishment of a Palestinian state. But Trump is mercurial. His positions may change. He may focus on a different problem or ease pressure on Israel.

Ultimately, the agreement does not represent a victory for either side, but rather an uneasy stall resulting from fatigue, pressure, and political calculations. Its continuation will depend less on the text of the agreement than on the willingness of all parties – especially Washington – to turn this fragile ceasefire into the basis for a more sustainable settlement.