As reported by Sally Ibrahim of The New Arab, the fragile ceasefire in the Gaza Strip has become a central concern as the war involving the United States, Israel, and Iran intensifies across the region. The truce, which followed what the outlet describes as the most devastating war in Gaza’s modern history, is now exposed to new pressures from an expanding Iran-linked confrontation whose trajectory remains uncertain. According to The New Arab, recent diplomacy reflects international concern that Gaza could again be drawn into wider regional conflict despite efforts to stabilize the pause in fighting.
Sources within Hamas told The New Arab that senior Hamas representatives met envoys in Cairo earlier this week who were described as representing US President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace.” According to these unnamed sources, the talks focused primarily on preventing the collapse of the Gaza ceasefire as regional tensions escalate. The New Arab reports that this was the first publicly known contact between Hamas and these envoys since the start of the war on Iran.
Shortly after the Cairo meeting, Israel announced it intended to reopen the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt, which has been shut since the Iran war began, but later reversed the decision, leaving the crossing closed. A Hamas official familiar with the discussions suggested to The New Arab that the initial reopening proposal could have been linked to mediation efforts aimed at preserving calm in Gaza while Israel redirects military attention elsewhere. The official said regional actors understand that opening another front in Gaza now could trigger uncontrolled escalation, and that there are attempts to keep the situation contained, at least temporarily.
Despite these diplomatic moves, Hamas representatives warned mediators that ongoing Israeli restrictions and military actions in Gaza threaten the viability of the ceasefire framework, while insisting the movement still considers itself formally committed to the truce. A Hamas source told The New Arab that more than 650 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza by Israeli forces since the ceasefire was declared last October, raising questions about how sustainable the agreement is in practice. The source argued that a ceasefire “cannot exist only on paper,” highlighting the gap between declared understandings and realities on the ground.
What are analysts and actors saying?
Palestinian political analyst Taysir Abdullah, based in Gaza, told The New Arab that the widening confrontation with Iran has reshaped Israel’s military calculations and the strategic weight of the Gaza front. Abdullah argued that Israeli political discourse has long tried to frame Hamas as part of a broader Iranian-led axis, portraying Gaza as one component of a larger confrontation with Tehran. He said this narrative allows Israel to link local developments in Gaza to its regional strategy and to justify escalatory policies by presenting them as part of a wider struggle against Iran.
Abdullah pointed to a recent Israeli Foreign Ministry publication, cited by The New Arab, claiming Hamas had sent a message to Iran’s new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, urging regional escalation. Israeli officials presented the alleged message as evidence of Hamas’s alignment with Tehran, according to the outlet. However, Abdullah told The New Arab that such claims serve a political purpose by reinforcing the portrayal of Hamas as an extension of Iranian influence, which can be used to justify military escalation in Gaza while framing Israel’s actions as a response to a regional threat rather than a localized conflict.
The analyst also suggested that certain recent Israeli military actions may be designed to test the durability of the ceasefire or pressure Hamas into a reaction. As reported by The New Arab, he cited an Israeli airstrike on a police vehicle near the entrance of al-Zawayda in central Gaza that killed nine people, including a security official, and wounded 14 others. Abdullah argued that such strikes can put Hamas under intense pressure, since a military response could allow Israel to claim the ceasefire has collapsed and resume broader operations, while non-response risks internal criticism.
At the same time, Abdullah told The New Arab he believes some Israeli strategists may not fear Hamas entering a wider regional conflict in its current weakened state. He suggested they could see a Hamas move into the broader war as an opportunity to further dismantle the group’s remaining military infrastructure in Gaza. This assessment underscores how Gaza’s internal dynamics and regional confrontation with Iran are increasingly intertwined in strategic thinking described by the analysts interviewed.
Supporting details and internal Hamas calculations
Inside Gaza, Hamas appears reluctant to re-enter a large-scale confrontation, according to senior movement sources who spoke to The New Arab. One senior Hamas source in Gaza acknowledged that the group’s military capabilities have been severely degraded by the recent war. The source said the conflict inflicted “enormous losses,” with many fighters and field commanders killed and key operational structures damaged.
The same source told The New Arab that Hamas lost a substantial portion of its rocket arsenal due to months of sustained Israeli bombardment. He said the ability to launch rockets at previous scales “is simply not available at this moment” because much of the infrastructure that supported such operations has been heavily targeted. These conditions, he explained, have forced Hamas to reassess its immediate priorities and consider the costs of any renewed confrontation.
According to the source, launching another war under current conditions would be “extremely costly” and require time for Hamas to reorganize and rebuild its capacities before contemplating another major conflict. He also pointed to the wider devastation across Gaza as a key factor in the movement’s calculations. The New Arab reports that the source described entire neighborhoods as destroyed and the population as exhausted after months of displacement, bombardment, and economic collapse.
The Hamas source told the outlet that starting a new war now would risk an even worse humanitarian crisis than the previous conflict and bluntly described such a move as “tantamount to suicide.” His comments suggest that the movement’s current stance toward the ceasefire is shaped both by military depletion and by the severe humanitarian conditions facing Gaza’s residents. These internal assessments help explain why Hamas is signaling formal commitment to the truce despite ongoing Israeli actions reported since its declaration.
Could tactical calm hold, and for how long?
Palestinian analysts interviewed by The New Arab say the war with Iran may actually reinforce short-term incentives for Israel to avoid a major escalation in Gaza, even as risks to the ceasefire grow. Gaza-based political analyst Akram Atallah told the outlet that Israel now views the confrontation with Iran as the central strategic front. He argued that Israeli leaders see the Iran war as directly linked to events following the 7 October attack and believe Tehran played a key role in backing forces Israel fought in Gaza.
Atallah said that, in practical terms, the Israeli military has already described Gaza as a secondary front. According to his analysis reported by The New Arab, when facing simultaneous threats, Israel must prioritize deployment of its forces, which can increase the appeal of maintaining relative calm in Gaza while focusing on the broader regional confrontation. From this perspective, he suggested, the current ceasefire reflects a tactical decision rather than a durable political settlement.
Gaza-based analyst Hossam al-Dajani offered a similar view while stressing the situation’s unpredictability, The New Arab reports. He said the continuation or escalation of the Iran-related conflict will influence developments in Gaza both directly and indirectly. Al-Dajani argued that if Israel becomes deeply engaged in a wider confrontation with Iran and allied groups, it may find calm in Gaza strategically useful to avoid stretching its military capabilities further.
However, al-Dajani warned that any such calm would remain fragile and reversible. He told The New Arab that decisions about stability in Gaza are embedded in broader regional calculations involving Iran, Hezbollah, and other actors, rather than being driven solely by Palestinian considerations. He further cautioned that diplomatic efforts focused on Gaza could lose traction if the regional crisis deepens, as mediators shift attention toward managing the larger confrontation, potentially stalling negotiations over Gaza.
For Gaza’s roughly two million residents, these intersecting military, diplomatic, and strategic calculations translate into an uncertain and precarious reality, according to The New Arab’s reporting. The ceasefire continues to hold formally but remains exposed to shifting dynamics in the escalating war between Israel, the United States, and Iran. As tensions with Iran rise, analysts and sources cited by the outlet suggest that quiet in Gaza may reflect a temporary, tactical pause shaped by regional considerations rather than a sign of lasting peace.
