Let me begin by saying that I hope for the sake of the residents of Gaza as well as the Israeli hostages and their families that this week’s ceasefire agreement not only brings a permanent end to the genocidal violence of the war but also creates the conditions in which Gazans can begin to rebuild their lives and Palestinians as a nation can achieve the state for which they have been struggling for eighty years.

That said, political analysis must be conducted with the head, not the heart. The head suggests that this ceasefire is most likely a temporary interruption of the war rather than the start of a permanent peace. No one knows what Trump’s envoy said in the reportedly tense meeting with Netanyahu, but I think it most unlikely that he threatened to cut off the supply of weapons. Did he offer a quid pro quo: agree to the ceasefire and America will continue to provide political cover for settlement expansion? No sooner had the agreement been signed and endorsed by the Israeli cabinet than Washington was promising to unlock delayed deliveries and ensure comprehensive re-supply. Incoming Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth said in his Senate confirmation hearing that Israel retains the right to kill every member of Hamas. Keep in mind that Hamas is not only a guerilla army but a social movement. Perhaps even worse, incoming Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee does not regard the illegal settlements in the West bank as illegal or settlements. And worse still: the day before the ceasefire was to go into effect, Netanyahu warned that this first phase was only a temporary pause to the fighting and that both Biden and Trump assured him that Israel had the right to restart the war if they chose.

The odds of such a pretext being found or created are much higher than this ceasefire holding and paving the way for the reconstruction of Gaza.

In the short term, Trump manages to get credit for the ceasefire (shades of the release of American hostages in Iran immediately upon the inauguration of Ronald Reagan in 1980). What exactly he will eventually get credit for remains to be seen. Everyone is right to celebrate the ceasefire, but that is only the most basic precondition of Gazans being able to rebuild their lives, and it does nothing to advance the broader struggle for Palestinian self-determination.

Hamas will try to spin the agreement as a victory, but what have they won? The release of prisoners? The Palestinian struggle for self-determination is not a struggle for the release of political prisoners. Moreover, most of those who will be released in the first phase were arrested after October 7th. In other words, had Oct 7th not happened, those prisoners would not have been in prison. Those who have been convicted of more serious crimes will be released to third countries. Should they try to sneak back into Gaza you can be certain that Israel would treat that subterfuge as a violation of the agreement and relaunch the war.

But the bigger question is: setting aside all humanist concern for the massive loss of life, did October 7th advance the Palestinian cause? The answer is no. Hamas has been pulverized as an organized fighting force. Its leadership and best trained cadres have been killed. Anthony Blinken noted that they have probably recruited as many members as they have lost, but recruitment is one thing, being a militarily effective force is another. Where will these new recruits be trained, and who will supply them with weapons? Since the imprimatur of Trump is now on this ceasefire– and whatever else Trump is he is a narcissistic ego-maniac– direct American involvement could not be ruled out if Hamas were to start openly training these new recruits. Hamas was banking on a general uprising in the West Bank as well as support from Hezbollah and Iran. There was an upsurge of struggle in the West Bank, but no general uprising, and the biggest impact of October 7th there was to dramatically intensify Israeli military activity. Hezbollah did support the struggle in Gaza until its leadership was killed and its fighting positions decimated in relentless airstrikes that forced it into a ceasefire. Iran engaged Israel on two occasions, but has been sufficiently cowed by the tactical defeat of Hezbollah to back off for the moment. The loss of Syria as a transit route for Iranian weapons into Lebanon is a serious setback for Tehran. In any case, they will likely have their hands full dealing with a renewal of Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign. As for the Houthis who continue to waste the scarce resources of one of the world’s poorest countries on “resistance,” their resistance is futile, militarily ineffective, and politically counter-productive.

Hamas can claim that Israel did not achieve its maximalist objectives in launching the war, but that is a distraction from the main issue. Did Hamas achieve its objectives of initiating a final phase of the struggle for self-determination that would lead to the defeat of Israel? Clearly, October 7th was a massive political failure. It may come to be known as the worst strategic decision in the history of national liberation struggles. It humiliated and embarrassed Israel, but successful national liberation struggles are are not about embarrassing the enemy but achieving national liberation. Moreover, that humiliation only served to amp up the ferocity of Israel’s response. One did not have to be an expert in Middle Eastern affairs to predict that Israel would completely flatten Gaza after losing more than 1000 soldiers’ and citizens’ lives. I am not an expert, and I did predict just that the day after the attacks.

Who is in the stronger position today, Hamas or Israel? Israel has suffered in the court of global public opinion, Spain and Ireland have recognized Palestinian statehood, and Netanyahu and Gallant have warrants for their arrest. The International Court of Justice continues to deliberate on the question of whether Israel committed genocide during its war. If completely destroying the life conditions of 2.3 million people is not genocide, what is? But France and Italy have said they will not arrest Netanyahu if he visits and Israel is unlikely to suffer any practically meaningful consequences even if the court concludes that genocide was committed so long as it enjoys American support. The idea that such support will be lost under Trump is almost unthinkable.

The most frightening thing about the situation is that there are people in the Israeli government to the right of and more extreme than Netanyahu. It would be nice if the majority of people learned from catastrophes like October 7th or 9/11 and asked themselves: what did our side do to help create the conditions in which an opposed group thought that a homicidal rampage was necessary? But that is almost never what happens. Wounded and humiliated people demand vengeance and give power and license to people ruthless enough to exact it. More circumspect, self-critical, and rational voices are sidelined and cowed into silence. Israeli’s demonstrated in the hundreds of thousands for the return of the hostages but it will be a long time before any Israeli government will make any concessions on the road to a Palestinian state.

At present, the political future of Gazans and Israelis is in the hands of two gangs of fundamentalists and an erratic, easily distracted American President. I see little hope for a revival of creative and constructive thinking during Trump’s term of office. How can the Israeli peace movement find the words to sway a majority of Israeli’s that the horrors will never stop until Palestinian self-determination is achieved? How can Palestinians create a new generation of leaders who can find the words to sway those in a position to force concessions- Israeli citizens and American governments– to take concrete steps towards the creation of a Palestinian state? Equally importantly, how can they keep the world’s attention focused on the festering structural problem once the ceasefire takes effect and the mind of global civil society wanders?