A botched Israeli airstrike in Qatar, a key US ally, was the true catalyst for renewed US peace efforts. The fear of the conflict spiraling out and drawing in other American allies—disrupting a broader Middle East agenda—prompted a decisive push for a resolution, more so than the ongoing tragedy in Gaza itself.
The Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, without Hamas being disarmed or an international force in place, creates a space for violent clashes. Hamas, armed gangs, and powerful clans are already competing for control, illustrating a critical risk in phased peace plans where security is not transferred seamlessly.
Despite a comprehensive Egyptian-led rebuilding plan, wealthy Gulf monarchies refuse to provide the necessary $55 billion. They will not invest funds that could be destroyed in a future conflict, making Hamas's disarmament a non-negotiable prerequisite for any major rebuilding effort to begin.
The peace deal materialized only after President Trump became personally and seriously invested. His direct pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu was the critical factor in shifting Israel's position, suggesting that previous, less forceful American approaches missed opportunities to end the conflict sooner.
Historically, rising and ruling powers don't stumble into war directly. Instead, their heightened distrust creates a tinderbox where a seemingly minor incident involving a third party (like the assassination in Sarajevo pre-WWI) can escalate uncontrollably into a catastrophic conflict.
Unlike predecessors who acted as "Israel's lawyer," Trump's administration applied coercive pressure to both Israeli and Hamas leadership. According to diplomats, this impartial approach was the key to brokering a peace deal where past efforts failed.
Even after a ceasefire, ordinary Gazans find the psychological toll of an unknown future more difficult than ongoing material hardships. The end of bombing does not bring immediate relief or hope, as fundamental questions about their lives, work, and homes remain unanswered, creating a burden greater than day-to-day scarcity.
Viewing the conflict as two rational sides in a misunderstanding is flawed. Both sides see the other as an existential threat and are willing to use extreme violence to achieve their goals. This reframes the narrative from a political dispute to a primal, violent tribal conflict where both sides see themselves as righteous.
The breakthrough was achieved by splitting the agreement into phases. The initial, easier phase focuses on hostage release and partial withdrawal. The most contentious issues, like post-war governance and Hamas's disarmament, were intentionally postponed, creating both immediate success and future risk.
Instead of bridging conflicting narratives, Donald Trump broke a negotiation impasse by unilaterally declaring Hamas's ambiguous response a success. By imposing a new narrative that "everybody wants peace," he preempted objections and forced both sides to proceed, demonstrating how a powerful actor can create momentum by defining reality.
Regional stability is an economic necessity for oil-rich nations. Peace allows them to accelerate monetization of their finite oil reserves and reinvest the capital into diversified, future-proof economies like AI and tourism before alternative energy devalues their primary asset.