Executive Summary

The October 2025 Gaza ceasefire, brokered under the Trump administration’s 20-point peace plan, represents a fragile pause in a conflict that has devastated Gaza over two years of warfare. Despite the formal cessation of hostilities, violence continues with over 400 Palestinian deaths reported since the truce began, and Israel’s December 24, 2025 accusations of Hamas violations threaten to unravel the agreement entirely. This case study examines the conflict dynamics, evaluates potential solutions, and assesses implications for Singapore and regional stability.

Case Study: The Current Crisis

Background and Context

The Gaza conflict escalated dramatically in late 2023, resulting in two years of sustained warfare that left Gaza’s infrastructure in ruins, created a massive humanitarian crisis, and displaced the majority of its 2.3 million residents. The ceasefire agreement reached in October 2025 emerged from intense diplomatic pressure, particularly from the United States under President Donald Trump’s second administration.

The October 2025 Ceasefire Framework

The 20-point peace plan introduced by President Trump in September 2025 established a phased approach to ending hostilities. The agreement envisions three key phases: an initial truce with hostage releases, steps toward demilitarization and governance transition, and ultimately Hamas’s complete disarmament and Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. The ceasefire officially took effect on October 10, 2025.

Key Stakeholders and Positions

Israel’s Position: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained that the ceasefire requires Hamas to be completely removed from power, full demilitarization of Gaza, and a comprehensive deradicalization program. Israel insists on security guarantees and the safe return of all hostages. Netanyahu’s government has stated it will respond to any violations with force.

Hamas’s Position: The militant organization has stated it will only surrender its weapons if a Palestinian state is established. Hamas continues to dispute Israeli claims about violations and maintains that Israel’s ongoing military actions constitute the primary breach of the ceasefire.

Palestinian Civilians: The population of Gaza faces catastrophic humanitarian conditions, with widespread destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, and critical infrastructure. Over 400 deaths have occurred since the ceasefire began, according to Gaza’s health ministry, indicating continued violence despite the formal truce.

Regional and International Actors: The United States has taken a leading role in brokering and maintaining the ceasefire. Regional powers including Egypt, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have varying degrees of influence and interest in the outcome. The United Nations and various humanitarian organizations continue to push for sustained peace and reconstruction.

The December 24, 2025 Incident

An explosive device detonated against an Israeli military vehicle in Rafah, lightly wounding an officer. Netanyahu immediately accused Hamas of violating the ceasefire and vowed retaliation. This incident exemplifies the fragility of the current arrangement, where any violence threatens to cascade into renewed full-scale conflict. Both sides regularly accuse each other of violations, creating a cycle of accusation and counter-accusation that undermines trust.

Core Challenges to the Ceasefire

Definitional Disagreements: The parties have not fully agreed on all terms of the peace plan. The fundamental disconnect between Israel’s demand for Hamas’s complete disarmament without conditions and Hamas’s insistence on linkage to Palestinian statehood creates an unbridgeable gap under current positions.

Trust Deficit: Two years of intense warfare have deepened mutual distrust. Each side views the other’s actions through the lens of hostility, making it nearly impossible to give benefit of the doubt on ambiguous incidents.

On-the-Ground Reality: The continued presence of Israeli forces in Gaza, ongoing security operations, and resistance activities create countless opportunities for violence and ceasefire violations.

Humanitarian Crisis: The scale of destruction and suffering in Gaza creates desperation that can fuel continued violence. Without rapid improvement in living conditions, popular support for continued resistance remains high.

Political Pressures: Netanyahu faces domestic political pressure from right-wing coalition partners opposed to concessions. Hamas faces pressure from more militant factions and must maintain credibility as a resistance movement.

Outlook: Three Scenarios

Scenario 1: Gradual Ceasefire Collapse (40% probability)

The most likely scenario involves a slow unraveling of the ceasefire through repeated incidents like the December 24 attack. Each violation prompts retaliation, which prompts counter-retaliation, creating an escalation spiral. Within 3-6 months, the ceasefire effectively collapses, though perhaps not formally. Low-intensity conflict continues indefinitely with periodic flare-ups into more intense fighting.

Indicators to Watch: Frequency of violent incidents, scale of Israeli retaliatory strikes, number of casualties, rhetoric from leadership on both sides.

Regional Impact: Continued instability prevents normalization of relations between Israel and Arab states. Humanitarian crisis in Gaza worsens. Regional powers become increasingly frustrated with the situation but lack leverage to enforce compliance.

Scenario 2: Renewed Major Conflict (25% probability)

A major incident such as a deadly attack on Israeli civilians, a significant Hamas rocket barrage, or a large-scale Israeli military operation triggers a return to full-scale warfare. The ceasefire is formally abandoned, and fighting resumes at levels similar to or exceeding the previous conflict period. This scenario could unfold rapidly, within weeks of a triggering incident.

Indicators to Watch: Major casualties from any single incident, formal announcements abandoning the ceasefire, large-scale military mobilization, mass evacuation warnings for Gaza civilians.

Regional Impact: Potential for wider regional conflict involving Hezbollah in Lebanon or Iranian-backed militias. Disruption to Red Sea shipping routes if Houthi forces in Yemen escalate attacks in solidarity. Derailment of any Israeli-Saudi normalization talks.

Scenario 3: Stabilization and Progress (35% probability)

Through intense diplomatic pressure, particularly from the United States and regional mediators, the ceasefire holds despite violations. Gradual confidence-building measures are implemented, including expanded humanitarian access, limited reconstruction, and incremental Israeli withdrawals from some areas. Hamas and Israel move toward implementing phase two of the peace plan, though with significant delays and modifications.

Indicators to Watch: Sustained decline in violent incidents over 2-3 months, concrete steps on hostage releases and prisoner exchanges, visible reconstruction activity in Gaza, international pledges of reconstruction funding, high-level diplomatic engagement.

Regional Impact: Opens space for broader Israeli-Arab normalization. Allows focus on reconstruction and humanitarian recovery. Creates precedent for negotiated settlements to seemingly intractable conflicts.

Long-Term Outlook (5-10 years)

Even in the best-case scenario, a comprehensive and durable peace remains distant. The most realistic positive outcome involves a long-term ceasefire with UN or international peacekeeping presence in Gaza, gradual reconstruction funded by international donors, and some form of Palestinian governance that is acceptable to Israel (likely not Hamas in its current form) but legitimate to Palestinians. This would represent “conflict management” rather than “conflict resolution.”

True resolution requires addressing core issues: Palestinian statehood, final borders, status of Jerusalem, rights of return for refugees, and security guarantees for Israel. These fundamental questions remain as contentious as ever and are unlikely to be resolved within the next decade given current political dynamics on both sides.

Solutions: A Multi-Track Approach

Immediate Stabilization Measures (0-6 months)

Enhanced Monitoring Mechanisms: Deploy international observers, potentially under UN auspices, to monitor ceasefire compliance by both parties. Establish clear, transparent reporting systems for incidents with rapid investigation protocols. Create a joint operations center where Israeli, Palestinian, and international representatives can communicate in real-time about security incidents to prevent escalation based on misunderstanding.

Humanitarian Surge: Launch a massive humanitarian operation to address immediate needs in Gaza. This includes food security, medical care, temporary shelter, water and sanitation, and essential services. International donors should commit substantial funding with rapid disbursement. Creating visible improvements in living conditions reduces desperation and support for continued violence.

Confidence-Building Through Exchanges: Accelerate the hostage-prisoner exchange process outlined in the peace plan. Each successful exchange builds credibility for the negotiation process and creates domestic constituencies on both sides invested in maintaining peace. Ensure transparent processes with international verification.

De-escalation Protocols: Establish clear, agreed-upon procedures for responding to incidents that prevent automatic escalation. This might include mandatory “cooling off” periods before retaliatory action, international mediation of disputed incidents, and proportionality assessments by neutral parties before responses.

Economic Relief: Allow expanded economic activity in Gaza, including fishing rights expansion, increased work permits for Gazans in Israel (with appropriate security screening), and opening of crossings for commercial goods. Economic improvement reduces support for armed groups and creates stakeholders in peace.

Medium-Term Governance and Security Solutions (6 months – 3 years)

Transitional Governance Structure: Create an interim Palestinian governance authority for Gaza that excludes Hamas’s military wing but could potentially include reformed political elements. This authority would be responsible for civilian administration, reconstruction management, and security coordination. Possible models include a technocratic government backed by the Palestinian Authority, an internationally supervised administration, or a reformed Palestinian unity government.

Phased Israeli Withdrawal: Implement a clear timeline and conditions for Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza. Tie withdrawal to verifiable security milestones such as documented disarmament of militant groups, cessation of tunnel construction, and establishment of effective Palestinian security forces. Consider international peacekeeping forces to provide security guarantees during transition period.

Demilitarization with Dignity: Design a disarmament process for Hamas and other militant groups that provides face-saving elements. This might include integration of some fighters into a Palestinian security force (after vetting), economic opportunities through reconstruction employment, and international recognition of a legitimate Palestinian political movement separate from armed resistance. The process must be phased, verified by international inspectors, and reciprocal with Israeli security measures.

Regional Security Architecture: Develop a comprehensive regional security framework involving Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. These countries can provide security guarantees, contribute to peacekeeping forces, and serve as mediators for disputes. A regional approach distributes the burden and provides multiple channels for conflict resolution.

Reconstruction with Accountability: Launch a major reconstruction program funded by international donors but with strict oversight to ensure materials are used for civilian purposes only. Employ blockchain or other tracking technologies to monitor materials flow. Create employment opportunities for Gazans in reconstruction, reducing economic desperation while rebuilding infrastructure. Link reconstruction aid to continued ceasefire compliance.

Long-Term Structural Solutions (3-10 years)

Political Horizon for Palestinians: Any durable solution requires offering Palestinians a credible path to statehood or another form of self-determination that is acceptable to them. Without addressing the fundamental political question, security measures alone cannot create lasting peace. This might involve renewed negotiations on a two-state solution, confederation models with Jordan, or other creative political arrangements. The key is providing hope for a better political future.

Economic Integration and Development: Transform Gaza’s economy from aid-dependent to self-sustaining through massive investment in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and industry. Develop Gaza’s port and airport capabilities under international security supervision. Create economic zones and trade arrangements that link Gaza to regional and global markets. Economic prosperity creates powerful constituencies opposed to renewed conflict.

Educational and Cultural Exchange: Launch comprehensive programs to reduce dehumanization and promote coexistence. This includes educational reform to remove incitement from curricula on both sides, people-to-people programs where security conditions allow, and cultural exchanges that build understanding. Multi-generational efforts are needed to heal trauma and reduce hatred.

Water and Environmental Cooperation: Address shared environmental challenges like water scarcity, pollution, and climate change through joint Israeli-Palestinian projects. Environmental cooperation can build trust while addressing practical needs that affect all parties. Consider regional water management agreements involving neighboring countries.

Truth and Reconciliation Mechanisms: When conditions permit, establish processes for communities to address grievances, acknowledge suffering, and build pathways to coexistence. Models from South Africa, Northern Ireland, and other post-conflict societies can be adapted to the Israeli-Palestinian context.

International Guarantees and Enforcement: Create robust international mechanisms to guarantee security commitments and enforce agreements. This might include permanent UN presence, NATO involvement, or a coalition of Arab and Western countries providing peacekeeping and monitoring. Strong enforcement mechanisms reduce the security dilemma where each side feels compelled to maintain overwhelming force.

Singapore’s Impact and Implications

Direct Impacts on Singapore

Maritime Security and Trade Routes: Singapore’s economy depends heavily on global maritime trade, with approximately 20% of global container trade passing through Singapore’s ports. The Gaza conflict has indirect effects on key shipping routes, particularly through the Red Sea and Suez Canal. During the conflict, Houthi forces in Yemen conducted attacks on shipping in solidarity with Palestinians, forcing some vessels to reroute around Africa. The article notes that Singapore’s PSA is prepared for potential increased demand if Red Sea routes reopen in 2026, indicating current disruption to optimal shipping patterns.

A renewed major conflict could trigger another wave of Red Sea attacks, increasing shipping costs, insurance premiums, and delivery times. This would impact Singapore’s port operations, logistics industry, and overall trade competitiveness. Conversely, a stable ceasefire would likely contribute to normalization of shipping routes, benefiting Singapore’s position as a global maritime hub.

Energy Security: While Singapore imports limited oil from the Middle East directly, global oil prices affect Singapore’s economy significantly as a major refining center and energy hub. Major conflict in the region typically triggers oil price volatility, affecting Singapore’s refining industry, petrochemical sector, and broader economy. A stable ceasefire contributes to global energy price stability, benefiting Singapore’s economic planning and competitiveness.

Defense and Security Cooperation: Singapore maintains defense relationships with multiple parties in the region. The country has training facilities and military cooperation agreements with various Middle Eastern nations and maintains its long-standing defense relationship with Israel, including military technology cooperation. Regional instability complicates these relationships and requires careful diplomatic navigation. Singapore must balance its security interests with its relationships across the Muslim world, where Israel-Palestine remains an emotionally charged issue.

Regional Diplomatic Environment: Singapore operates within ASEAN and maintains relationships across the Islamic world, including with Malaysia and Indonesia where public opinion strongly supports Palestinians. Major escalation in Gaza typically produces diplomatic tensions that Singapore must navigate carefully. The conflict affects Singapore’s ability to facilitate dialogue and maintain its role as a trusted neutral party in regional and international forums.

Indirect and Strategic Implications

Precedent for Conflict Resolution: Singapore has a strong interest in the international system’s ability to resolve conflicts through negotiation and international law. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict represents one of the world’s most intractable disputes. Successful resolution or conflict management would strengthen norms of peaceful settlement, while failure reinforces might-makes-right approaches that threaten small states like Singapore. Singapore has consistently advocated for rules-based international order, and the Gaza situation tests whether such an order can function effectively.

Humanitarian Diplomacy: Singapore has contributed humanitarian assistance to Palestinian refugees through international organizations and could potentially play a role in post-conflict reconstruction. As a developed nation with significant engineering and urban planning expertise, Singapore could contribute technical assistance to Gaza’s rebuilding, which would enhance Singapore’s soft power and regional standing.

Interfaith Harmony: Singapore’s multi-religious society requires careful management of religious tensions. The Gaza conflict has potential to strain inter-religious relations between Singaporean Muslims, Jews, and others. The government’s approach to discussing and responding to the conflict affects domestic social cohesion. Successful peacemaking in Gaza would reduce one source of potential interfaith tension domestically.

Global Governance and UN System: As a strong supporter of international institutions, Singapore has stakes in whether the UN and international system can effectively address the Gaza crisis. The conflict has paralyzed the UN Security Council and exposed limitations of international humanitarian law enforcement. These systemic weaknesses affect Singapore’s security environment as a small state dependent on international law and institutions.

Economic Ripple Effects: Beyond direct trade route impacts, major Middle East instability affects global economic confidence, investment flows, and financial markets. Singapore’s role as a financial center means that regional instability in the Middle East creates volatility in capital flows, currency markets, and investor sentiment that affect Singapore’s financial services sector.

Singapore’s Potential Role

Neutral Convener: Singapore could potentially serve as a venue for Track II diplomacy or technical negotiations on specific issues like reconstruction planning, environmental cooperation, or economic development. Singapore’s reputation for neutrality, efficiency, and multi-religious harmony makes it a potential meeting ground for parties seeking to engage on less politicized aspects of peacebuilding.

Technical Assistance Provider: Singapore’s expertise in urban planning, water management, port development, and efficient governance could be valuable in Gaza’s reconstruction. Singapore could offer training programs for Palestinian administrators and technicians, share best practices in resource management, and potentially participate in reconstruction planning.

Humanitarian Contributions: Singapore can continue and expand humanitarian assistance through international organizations, demonstrating solidarity with civilian populations while maintaining diplomatic balance. This could include medical assistance, emergency supplies, or support for refugee services in neighboring countries.

Regional Bridge-Building: Singapore’s relationships across the Muslim world and its pragmatic approach to international relations position it to facilitate dialogue and understanding between Middle Eastern actors and Western partners. Singapore can use its convening power to bring together diverse stakeholders in informal settings.

Advocacy for International Law: Singapore can continue advocating for rules-based approaches to conflict resolution, protection of civilians, and accountability for violations of international humanitarian law. As a respected voice in international forums, Singapore’s principled positions carry weight beyond its size.

Conclusion

The Gaza ceasefire of October 2025 represents a fragile pause in a devastating conflict rather than a durable peace. The December 24, 2025 incident and Netanyahu’s accusations of violations demonstrate how easily the arrangement could collapse. The most likely scenarios involve either gradual deterioration or renewed major conflict, though a stabilization and progress scenario remains possible with sustained diplomatic effort.

Achieving a durable peace requires addressing immediate security concerns while simultaneously tackling the fundamental political questions that have driven the conflict for decades. This demands a multi-track approach combining short-term stabilization measures, medium-term governance and security arrangements, and long-term structural solutions that give both Israelis and Palestinians security, dignity, and hope for the future.

For Singapore, the conflict’s trajectory has direct implications for maritime trade, energy security, and regional stability, while also affecting broader interests in rules-based international order and interfaith harmony. Singapore can contribute through humanitarian assistance, technical expertise in reconstruction, and its role as a neutral convener for dialogue.

The international community, including nations like Singapore, must sustain engagement with this conflict not only for humanitarian reasons but because allowing it to fester threatens regional stability, international norms, and global economic flows in ways that affect all nations. The window for stabilizing the current ceasefire and building toward a more sustainable peace may be brief. Without concerted action in the coming months, the cycle of violence that has plagued Gaza for generations seems destined to continue.