Sky News analysis on failing Middle East ceasefires

Ceasefires are meant to stop fighting, but in the Middle East they often fail to deliver lasting peace. A new analysis explains why agreements in Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran have not ended the violence, and why the word 'ceasefire' can be misleading.

A ceasefire is not a legal document. It is simply an agreement between warring parties to stop shooting and start talking. As one legal expert put it, 'All ceasefires are quite fragile by nature because they are the first step towards war termination.' The details vary widely: some are written, some are negotiated over the phone, and some are announced on social media. But the core problem is that they are open to interpretation, lack accountability, and depend on trust between enemies who have none.

The most striking example is Gaza. A ceasefire came into force on 10 October last year, but data from the conflict monitoring group ACLED shows that 2,926 reported attacks have taken place in the strip since then. Of those, 2,920 were carried out by the Israeli military, including attacks from vessels. Hamas and allied groups reportedly carried out six attacks on Israeli forces. The Israeli military did not dispute the figures, saying it operates in accordance with international law and only strikes military targets.

For people living in Gaza, the ceasefire has not brought safety. Displaced families in tents near the port still hear explosions. Doctors at Al-Shifa Hospital describe it as an active war. The Gaza health ministry, run by Hamas, says 1,198 people have been killed during the ceasefire period, including 264 children, which is 22% of the total. Five Israeli soldiers have also been killed, according to the military.

The ceasefire was part of a 20-point peace plan announced by Donald Trump in September last year. It included a partial Israeli withdrawal to the 'yellow line', a hostage exchange, and a promise to allow 600 aid trucks into Gaza each day. But aid flows have been far below that, and both sides accuse each other of breaking the terms.

Why do ceasefires break down so often? The analysis points to three main flaws: they are open to interpretation, there is no enforcement mechanism, and the parties do not trust each other. A ceasefire is only the first step towards peace, not the end of conflict. As one correspondent put it, the current Gaza ceasefire is 'fragile, failing, and only just about worthy of the definition.'

In Lebanon and Iran, similar patterns emerge. Each conflict has its own nuances, but the underlying problem is the same: a ceasefire is a pause, not a solution. Without a political process to address the root causes, the fighting tends to resume.