What Comes After Gaza’s Ceasefire?

Inside the fragile peace deal, billion-dollar plans, and bitter realities shaping Gaza’s uncertain future.

Two years after Hamas slaughtered nearly 1,200 Israelis and provoked a scorched-earth response, the last Israeli hostages have been freed to a grateful nation. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Palestinians are walking north through a wasteland—searching for the ruins of homes that no longer exist. An estimated 60,000 Palestinians, including 9,000 fighters, were killed in the war that followed Hamas’s attack. More than 80 percent of Gaza’s buildings have been damaged or destroyed. Public and private infrastructure have vanished.

In Israel, the return of both living hostages and the bodies of the dead answered a collective prayer for a truce—and for healing between those who supported the offensive and those who pleaded for it to stop. The hopeful see this as the dawn of genuine peace. The truth is, no one knows what comes next.

The Trump administration and the president deserve credit for brokering the deal that ended the fighting. Even Israel’s hawkish prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Hamas leaders have acknowledged their role. But both sides are also counting on America to guarantee peace and finance the reconstruction of Gaza’s moonscape. And as is often the case with Trump, the hype is already outpacing the reality.

The administration’s press release called it the beginning of a “Strong, Durable, and Everlasting Peace.” That’s not true. The deal is designed to achieve four limited objectives:

• A ceasefire

• The pullback—but not full withdrawal—of most Israeli forces

• An exchange of roughly 45 Israeli hostages and bodies for nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners

• Massive deliveries of food and water to displaced civilians

With the guns silent and Gaza’s long march home underway, aid trucks have begun crossing from Egypt into Gaza through a reopened border. Israeli troops have eased back from population centers.

Several critical issues remain unresolved. Hamas has not accepted Israel’s demand for complete disarmament and the destruction of its tunnel network. Israel, for its part, has not agreed to fully withdraw troops and heavy weapons. No consensus exists on deploying an international peacekeeping force, and there’s no clear plan for Gaza’s governance during reconstruction. Hamas insists Gaza must be ruled by Palestinians; its fighters have even erected checkpoints along roads leading home.

Various postwar plans are under review, but neither grants Palestinians genuine control. One proposal envisions the mass relocation of the population—either to restricted areas within Gaza or abroad—while a “new Gaza” rises, funded by $100 billion in mostly private investment. The Israeli plan imagines a prosperous region built on manufacturing, tech, tourism, and “smart cities” powered by artificial intelligence.

A similar vision from the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change calls for a transitional government led by a five-member international commission—possibly including one Palestinian representative, if a “qualified” candidate can be found. Under this plan, the Gaza International Transitional Authority (GITA) would operate under Blair’s supervision, with billionaires financing redevelopment around technology and tourism. The idea: turn Gaza’s 25-mile coastline into a Mediterranean Riviera, while tech start-ups anchor the new economy.

Private investment could indeed help rebuild Gaza—if local rights are respected. But before any of that, two million people need food, shelter, water, and sanitation. Whoever governs must also restore schools, hospitals, and basic civil administration.

With neither plan providing a real role for Hamas—or Palestinians generally—it’s hard to see either succeeding. Life amid the rubble breeds resentment, and resentment breeds radicalization. That’s how peace dies.

The coming months will test whether this ceasefire can evolve into something lasting—or whether it becomes just another mirage sold to the world. The devil is in the details. And with a president disinterested in details, we can only hope the rest of the parties manage to fill in the gaps.