On Oct. 22, the International Court of Justice urged Israel to allow unimpeded humanitarian access and cooperate with UN agencies,[1] including UNRWA. In parallel, the UNGA’s Sept. 12 New York Declaration on the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the Implementation of the Two-State Solution has widened diplomatic pathways toward Palestinian statehood.[2] Yet, de jure momentum has not translated de facto: access remains constrained, and operational conditions on the field do not show measurable improvement for civilians. From a regional vantage point, the present lull recalls earlier interludes in 1973 or 1982, when pauses tempered the fire but rarely acted as warranties. In the West Bank, the olive harvest season coincides with heightened settler displacement,[3][4] a pattern that undermines prospects for de-escalation.
Regional reporting from the Cairo and Doha mediation tracks,[5] corroborated by UNRWA Gaza Field Office notes, points to a theatre filled with uncertainty. The October pause – after a two-year open conflict – opened a narrow space for hostage and prisoner exchanges and intermittent convoys.[6] In Gaza, relief is moving but constrained. Aid volumes still undershoot needs. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reported that the humanitarian scale-up remains restricted by access interruptions and inspection bottlenecks.[7] Trucks continue to stage at Al-Arish, with Rafah essentially shut, and multiple reports note that hundreds more are waiting while actual entries remain far below pledges.[8] Recently, the Egyptian Red Crescent dispatched a major convoy, underscoring that pipeline supply exists even as clearances are stop-and-start.[9] Until steady cross-border truck schedules, predictable clearances for fuel and other critical goods, and verifiable agency access are established and sustained, the preconditions for durable stability remain remote – even as reports of ongoing violence and military actions continue to cause heavy casualties.[10]
The line between the conflict and post-conflict is undefined. Trump’s 20-Point Plan[11] tied ceasefire, hostage and prisoner releases, pullback, and technocratic rule in Gaza. So far, Hamas rejected complete disarmament and used the pause to reemerge, signal survival, and tighten control. These developments also underscore that Hamas’s military wing in Gaza is not necessarily aligned with its political leadership in Doha.
From a zenithal view, a tetrad of regional vectors requires attention. Along the Lebanon frontier, “enforcement” strikes against Hezbollah[12] have lowered the daily temperature without eliminating the risk of miscalculation and snapping the current equilibrium. Syria endures as a controlled, low-boil theatre in which supply lines are managed below open-war thresholds, keeping escalation risk present but contained. At the Aden Gulf and the Bab el-Mandeb, Houthi activity continues to disrupt shipping[13] and reshape the mosaic of maritime routes.
The de-escalatory understandings between Israel and Iran are also fragile, and the regional political distance from Israel is widening across capitals. Meanwhile, Iran’s military capabilities have been reinforced, mainly through the acquisition of air defenses and fighter jets – unofficial reports mention the purchase of the J1OC from China in exchange for oil, as well as an unconfirmed number of Su-35s from Russia – in two tactical spheres that were vulnerable during the Twelve Day War last June.
Israel’s domestic landscape is marked by intra-coalition divergence between the hard-liner factions and security pragmatists on ceasefire parameters, multilateral resolutions, hostage-exchange sequencing, and West Bank policy. Public pressure from hostage families and recurring demonstrations over governance and accountability heighten these fissures, while civil-military friction complicates decision cycles and narrows policy bandwidth.
On the Palestinian side, governance in Gaza is degraded and contested even as reports of hostilities and casualties continue,[14] with service delivery and administrative control disrupted. In the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority faces structural legitimacy and capacity constraints, including fiscal stress, fragmented security provision, and periodic disruption of civil services, amid heightened settler-Palestinian friction.[15]
Social cohesion across both societies is under strain, considering trauma, displacement, and polarised information ecosystems – reducing political maneuverability and leaving stabilisation efforts tightly coupled to domestic political heterogeneity and an economic toll that is difficult to calculate, but with real effects on the population.
What, then, can to expect in the weeks ahead? As at past inflexion points such as in Suez or Oslo in 1973 and 1993, respectively, the world stands at a hinge of history, two parallel realities in motion: the one drafted at desks, and the one written in dust and on the ground. Sequenced prisoner exchanges and border openings will set the near-term agenda. The limited confrontation along the Israel-Lebanon border and the volatile stability in the Red Sea are expected to persist. In parallel, the recognition-of-Palestine track is reshaping incentives for governance and security arrangements. With violence persisting, the humanitarian outlook is negative: displacement endures, health systems are strained, and aid is in short supply.
These scenarios should galvanise third states from the region to make a blueprint, thereby facilitating the expansion of de-confliction mechanisms and coordinating security guarantees that reduce spillover risk and ensure a societal recovery. Regional diplomacy must navigate festina lente – acting with urgency but with due caution – to prevent a slide from truce to conflict escalation. Indeed, even when the conflict and humanitarian status remain vulnerable, the diplomatic efforts of third states have helped achieve prisoner exchanges, a partial Israeli pullback, improved humanitarian access, and a plausible pathway for transition.
Off-stage diplomacy has been calibrated and increasingly condition-based. Gulf partners are hedging toward de-escalation while retaining leverage with Israel and the U.S.[16] Qatar sustains mediation efforts and detainee-exchange channels without entering a normalisation track. Saudi Arabia keeps conditional pathways, linking any step to statehood benchmarks. The UAE maintains Abraham Accords-based ties while pacing visibility to humanitarian and legal optics.[17] Discreet security coordination – notably, air and maritime incident reporting and early warning – persists, albeit with limited political bandwidth.
Türkiye has downgraded its political contacts, framing its regional policy through Gaza solidarity, which limits its mediation capabilities. However, intelligence and de-confliction capabilities may persist on a contingency basis.[18] Egypt remains the gatekeeper to Al-Arish and Rafah, and keeps its finger on the switch for ceasefire and incident-management mechanisms linked to Beirut as well.[19][20]
Sandglass diplomacy evokes finite time and recycled deadlines: mediators keep flipping the hourglass, aware that its grains are limited. At the same time, unresolved grievances and asymmetries prevent the conflict from being resolved. The international order is a carpet where one loose yarn unravels the whole. Diplomatic efforts show that anything that can be locked by one man can be unlocked by another. Certainly, diplomacy has shown progress on paper – from the United Nations to the Sharm El-Sheikh Peace Summit – but that hasn’t been translated into tangible relief. Fail that test, and the sandglass tilts back toward familiar tempests.
The tragedy of decision-making for Israel-Gaza at this stage is that every remedy issues a ticket to new difficulties, and the sandglass diplomacy that seeks a finite end has not yielded results in a two-year act. The arc of revolutions has two acts: rupture – upending the status quo – and the craft of repair. Often, the second is as hard as the first. Today’s foresights of a Pax Fragilis in Gaza, brokered under diplomatic attrition, are narrow, considering the continuity of the humanitarian crisis, regional reactiveness, the limited scope of de-escalation channels, the motivations of multiple actors towards a permanent ceasefire, and the governance capabilities of Israel and Palestine to build a pathway with certainty.
The only answer is to continue to labour through to peace—ex labore ad pacem. Peacebuilding is an imperfect process; every step carries risk, and the delays trigger human costs.
Mauricio D. Aceves is an advisor for security and border issues at STRATOP Risk Consulting, a Mexican Council on Foreign Relations member, and an analyst on contemporary Middle East and Central Asia issues.
This article was exclusively written for Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. You can read more exclusive content here.
Support our work here.
For permission to republish, please contact outreach@gatewayhouse.in
©Copyright 2025 Gateway House: Indian Council on Global Relations. All rights reserved. Any unauthorised copying or reproduction is strictly prohibited.
References:
[1] International Court of Justice, “Obligations of Israel in Relation to the Presence and Activities of the United Nations, Other International Organizations and Third States in and in Relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, ICJ, 2025. (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6814df8578d8cdc68ff03b63/UK_submission_to_the_International_Court_of_Justice_on_Israel_s_obligations_in_the_Occupied_Palestinian_Territories.pdf)
[2] United Nations News, “General Assembly endorses New York Declaration on two-State solution between Israel and Palestine”, UN News, September 12, 2025. (https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/09/1165835)
[3] OCHA oPt, “Humanitarian Situation Update #330 — West Bank”, OCHA oPt, October 09, 2025. (https://www.ochaopt.org/content/humanitarian-situation-update-330-west-bank)
[4] Daniel Tester, “Why are Israeli settlers destroying the Palestinian olive harvest?”, Middle East Eye, October 29, 2025. https://www.middleeasteye.net/explainers/olive-harvest-israeli-settlers-palestine-west-bank
[5] State Information Service (Egypt), “Sharm el-Sheikh Peace Summit”, SIS Egypt, November 02, 2025. (https://sis.gov.eg/en/media-center/events/sharm-el-sheikh-peace-summit/)
[6] Qatar News Agency, “Part of Gaza ceasefire agreement: Israeli occupation releases batch of Palestinian prisoners”, QNA, October 13, 2025. (https://qna.org.qa/en/news/news-details?id=part-of-gaza-ceasefire-agreement-israeli-occupation-releases-batch-of-palestinian-prisoners&date=13/10/2025)
[7] United Nations (UNISPAL), “OCHA Press Release — 30 October 2025”, United Nations, October 30, 2025. (https://www.un.org/unispal/document/ocha-press-release-30oct25/)
[8] Africanews, “Humanitarian aid blocked at Rafah crossing as ICJ orders Israel to act”, Africanews, October 25, 2025. (https://www.africanews.com/2025/10/25/humanitarian-aid-blocked-at-rafah-crossing-as-icj-orders-israel-to-act/)
[9] Egypt Forward, “Egypt delivers 58th humanitarian convoy to Gaza with over 400 [units]”, Egypt Forward, October 30, 2025. (https://egyptfwd.org/Article/4/6750/Egypt-delivers-58th-humanitarian-convoy-to-Gaza-with-over-400)
[10] Médecins Sans Frontières (Luxembourg), “Plus de 190 blessés pris en charge dans des hôpitaux soutenus par MSF après de nouvelles…”, MSF Luxembourg, October 30, 2025. (https://msf.lu/en/articles/plus-de-190-blesses-pris-en-charge-dans-des-hopitaux-soutenus-par-msf-apres-de-nouvelles)
[11] The White House, “President Donald J. Trump’s Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict”, @WhiteHouse, September 29, 2025. https://x.com/whitehouse/status/1972736025597219278?s=61
[12] Euronews, “Israel warns it will intensify strikes on Hezbollah if Lebanese government does not move to…”, Euronews, November 2, 2025. (https://www.euronews.com/2025/11/02/israel-warns-to-intensify-strikes-on-hezbollah-if-lebanese-government-does-not-move-to-dis)
[13] Dryad Global (Channel 16), “Maritime Security Outlook: Gulf of Aden escalations, GPS interference in the Gulf and piracy risks rising”, Dryad Global, November 02, 2025. (https://channel16.dryadglobal.com/maritime-security-outlook-gulf-of-aden-escalations-gps-interference-in-the-gulf-and-piracy-risks-rising)
[14] OCHA oPt, “Reported Impact Snapshot — Gaza Strip — 29 October 2025”, OCHA oPt, October 29, 2025. (https://www.ochaopt.org/content/reported-impact-snapshot-gaza-strip-29-october-2025)
[15] International Crisis Group, “Sovereignty in All but Name: Israel’s Quickening Annexation of the West Bank”, Crisis Group, October 09, 2025. (https://www.crisisgroup.org/middle-east-north-africa/israelpalestine/252-sovereignty-all-name-israels-quickening-annexation-west-bank)
[16] The White House, “The Trump Declaration for Enduring Peace and Prosperity”, The White House, October 23, 2025. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/10/the-trump-declaration-for-enduring-peace-and-prosperity/)
[17] Gulf Research Center, “Commentary No. 317”, GRC, October 15, 2025. (https://www.grc.net/single-commentary/317)
[18] Yeni Şafak, “Türkiye to host ministerial meeting on Gaza crisis in Istanbul”, Yeni Şafak, November 02, 2025. (https://en.yenisafak.com/turkiye/turkiye-to-host-ministerial-meeting-on-gaza-crisis-in-istanbul-3710093)
[19] Yaffa Press Service, “[Report]”, Yaffa Press Service, accessed October 31, 2025. (https://yaffaps.com/en/page-57543.html)
[20] L’Orient-Le Jour, “Egypt strengthens its role in the Middle East after Gaza, Lebanon”, L’Orient-Le Jour, October 29, 2025. (https://today.lorientlejour.com/article/1482929/egypt-strengthens-its-role-in-the-middle-east-after-gaza-lebanon.html)