Gaza Ceasefire Is a Temporary Pause, Not the End of the War; Israel Fails to Achieve Its Objectives
webangah News Agency, International Desk: Muhammad Sayed Ahmed, a leading Egyptian political analyst and sociologist, provides an insightful assessment of the Gaza ceasefire after nearly two years of war in an exclusive interview with Tehran Times.
Sayed Ahmed argues that this agreement represents only a temporary halt. While it stops Israel’s military operations,it fails to address key issues such as occupation,displacement,and Palestinians’ right to establish an self-reliant state.
The full interview is as follows:
How do you assess the meaning of the Gaza ceasefire after almost two years of destructive conflict?
I believe this agreement is very important because this has been the longest war waged by the Zionist enemy against the Palestinian people. For two years, we witnessed siege, devastation, and what amounts to a real attempt at genocide against Palestinians. Thus, halting this war and accepting this agreement was crucial so that Palestinians and their resistance forces could catch their breath.
We understand well that this war has not ended; it is a struggle for existence rather than borders. The ceasefire does not signify an end to hostilities-it only represents a pause-and thus holds critical importance at this moment. I believe Palestinians alongside their resistance have somewhat defeated the Zionist enemy.
Their declared objectives were unmet: people were not displaced en masse, nor was the resistance destroyed. This alone counts as a victory for both Palestinian people and resistance over their adversary.
In your view, what key factors compelled Israel to accept this particular agreement now?
The Zionist enemy agreed because continuing warfare had become unbearable under mounting international and domestic pressures. The internal situation among Israelis in occupied territories deteriorated significantly. Settlers lived for two continuous years under constant fear and threat while morale within Israel’s occupying forces reached its lowest level.
The settlers turned away from Benjamin Netanyahu-thay acknowledged Tel Aviv could not secure victory-so stopping fighting became imperative. These internal pressures combined with severe economic, social, military, and political damages forced Tel Aviv to halt its operations.
International public opinion also dealt serious blows; beyond Western governments’ stance was growing global empathy toward Palestine’s cause among ordinary citizens worldwide.
The narratives depicting Palestinians as terrorists collapsed; rather they were seen as national defenders rising up to reclaim their rights to liberate occupied lands while Israeli narratives weakened considerably.
How do you evaluate Trump’s controversial 20-point plan widely debated politically?
I consider trump’s plan fundamentally Zionist-it does nothing beneficial for Palestinian people or resistance movements. Many of its provisions are outright unacceptable for Palestinians.
Essentially its aim is dismantling resistance capabilities while establishing an international or foreign-led government under figures like Trump or Tony Blair.
Hamas responded wisely by preventing disarmament-this safeguarded Hamas’ position on Gaza’s political scene as an active player.
I believe Trump’s objectives failed since Hamas refused both disarmament demands or external management over parts of Gaza governance.
Some argue that Trump’s plan seeks to redefine Palestine’s issue without addressing roots such as occupation or palestinian statehood rights-is this your view too?
I agree entirely: It bypasses essential problems without granting Palestinians right to form their own state.
It primarily functions as a pause-to stop bloodshed temporarily-but conflict with israel will persist through different phases.
We must use this time productively: rebuilding Gaza,
stabilizing civilian conditions,
reorganizing all Palestinian factions including armed groups,
and promoting unity efforts.
resistance remains essential, as we confront survival-not merely territorial disputes.
Israel continues promoting expansionist slogans “from Nile to Euphrates” aiming beyond displacing only Palestinians but affecting wider Arab populations;
they regard these aims mission-critical despite international laws acknowledging 157 countries (of 193 UN members) supporting Palestinian state formation-a reality they refuse voluntarily accept.
The UN partition decision from 1947 still hasn’t established a Palestinian state after nearly eight decades:
Regrettably liberation cannot come except through armed struggle-resistance must reorganize early once capable<having regained strength-to prepare anew for future fights ahead.'
‘
‘
(Note: original includes numerical data formatted accordingly)
”
“ How do Egypt & Arab world view Tony Blair overseeing post-war governance suggested by Trump?
Tony Blair’s proposed role managing Gaza has been fully rejected by Egypt & broadly throughout Arab nations.Egypt played fundamental part shaping Hamas’ response helping rebuff idea.Egypt insists destiny lies entirely in hands of all Palestinain factions including all stakeholders.Hamas openly denied foreign governmental oversight.Two Donald supported Hamas reply firmly declining western governance guiding Strip.
Do you think Western supervision diminishes Arab influence & regional sovereignty handling Gazans matter?
No,I don’t think western monitoring strengthens Arabs but weakens them.Gaza remains core issue close linked Palestine cause.If Hamas agreed foreign govt control plus disarming,last truly would sideline national ambition.Main goals wartime forced displacement ,ending HAMAS weren’t realized.Consequently,fate survives along Resistance lives still vibrant.Fighting may endure seeking total liberation occupied homelands.
