The approval came after intense negotiations and diplomatic efforts, culminating in a Cabinet vote to endorse the ceasefire and hostage release agreement. According to a statement from Netanyahu’s office, “The government, headed by Benjamin Netanyahu, approved the agreement to end the war in the Gaza Strip and return all hostages (Israeli prisoners in Gaza).” This decision paves the way for an immediate cessation of hostilities, with the ceasefire set to take effect promptly, as reported by Israel’s public broadcaster, KAN. The broadcaster emphasized that the official approval signifies the agreement’s immediate implementation, setting in motion a series of carefully orchestrated steps to halt the violence and address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
The agreement follows a breakthrough announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday, October 8, 2025, who revealed that Israel and Hamas, the Palestinian group controlling Gaza, had reached a consensus on the first phase of a comprehensive plan for a ceasefire and prisoner exchange. This milestone was achieved after four days of indirect negotiations held in the Egyptian coastal city of Sharm el-Sheikh. The talks involved delegations from Türkiye, Egypt, and Qatar, with the United States overseeing the process to ensure a balanced and constructive dialogue. The inclusion of regional powers such as Egypt and Qatar, alongside Türkiye, underscores the international community’s commitment to brokering peace in the region, with these countries playing a pivotal role in mediating between the conflicting parties.
While the agreement received broad support within the Israeli Cabinet, it was not without dissent. Five ministers, including National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, voted against the deal. Both Ben-Gvir and Smotrich lead far-right factions—Jewish Power and Religious Zionism, respectively—whose opposition reflects deep-seated ideological differences within Israel’s political spectrum. Their objections highlight concerns among some hardline factions about the terms of the agreement, particularly regarding concessions to Palestinian groups and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza. Despite this resistance, the majority approval in the Cabinet underscores a pragmatic willingness to prioritize peace and the safe return of hostages over political divisions.
Under the terms of the agreement, a ceasefire will take effect immediately, with the Israeli military tasked with withdrawing to the “yellow line”—a designated boundary within the Gaza Strip—within 24 hours of the approval. This initial step is critical to de-escalating the conflict and creating a conducive environment for further negotiations. Following the withdrawal, Hamas is obligated to release all living Israeli hostages within 72 hours, as stipulated by KAN. This rapid timeline reflects the urgency of addressing the hostage crisis, a key issue that has galvanized public and political support for the agreement in Israel. The government’s approval also grants the Israeli military the authority to begin a gradual withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, a process that will be closely monitored to ensure compliance with the agreement’s terms.
The broader framework for this agreement is rooted in a 20-point plan unveiled by President Trump on September 29, 2025, which outlines a phased approach to resolving the conflict in Gaza. The first phase, now in motion, focuses on the release of all Israeli captives held in Gaza in exchange for approximately 2,000 Palestinian prisoners detained by Israel. This prisoner swap is a cornerstone of the agreement, addressing a longstanding point of contention between the two sides. Additionally, the plan calls for a permanent ceasefire and the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces from the entire Gaza Strip, signaling a commitment to reducing military presence and fostering conditions for long-term stability.
The second phase of Trump’s plan introduces more ambitious and complex objectives, including the establishment of a new governing mechanism in Gaza that excludes Hamas. This proposal envisions a security force composed of Palestinians and troops from Arab and Islamic countries, tasked with maintaining order and preventing the resurgence of violence. The plan also calls for the disarmament of Hamas, a contentious issue that is likely to face significant resistance from the group and its supporters. Furthermore, it stipulates that Arab and Islamic countries will provide funding for the reconstruction of Gaza and the establishment of a new administration, with limited participation from the Palestinian Authority. This financial and logistical support is seen as critical to rebuilding Gaza’s infrastructure, which has been devastated by years of conflict and recent Israeli military operations.
The response from Arab and Muslim countries has been largely positive, with many welcoming Trump’s plan as a constructive framework for peace. However, some officials have cautioned that the plan’s success hinges on further discussions and negotiations to iron out critical details. Issues such as the composition of the new governing body, the role of international forces, and the specifics of reconstruction funding remain points of contention that will require careful diplomacy. The involvement of regional powers like Egypt, Qatar, and Türkiye is expected to play a crucial role in bridging gaps and ensuring that the agreement is implemented effectively.
The conflict in Gaza, which escalated dramatically in October 2023, has exacted a devastating toll on the Palestinian population. Israeli military operations have resulted in the deaths of nearly 67,200 Palestinians, predominantly women and children, according to local authorities. The relentless bombardment has rendered much of Gaza uninhabitable, displacing hundreds of thousands of residents and destroying critical infrastructure, including hospitals, schools, and residential areas. The humanitarian crisis in the enclave has drawn global condemnation, with international organizations calling for an immediate ceasefire and increased aid to address the dire needs of the population.
The approval of this agreement represents a glimmer of hope in an otherwise bleak landscape. For many in Gaza, the prospect of a ceasefire offers a chance to rebuild lives shattered by violence and displacement. In Israel, the return of hostages is a deeply emotional issue, with families and communities anxiously awaiting the safe release of their loved ones. However, the road to lasting peace remains fraught with challenges. The ideological divide within Israel’s government, as evidenced by the dissenting votes, underscores the difficulty of achieving consensus on issues related to Palestinian rights and territorial control. Similarly, Hamas’s willingness to comply with the terms of the agreement, particularly the release of hostages and eventual disarmament, remains uncertain.
The international community’s role in supporting this agreement cannot be overstated. The mediation efforts of Egypt, Qatar, and Türkiye, combined with U.S. oversight, have been instrumental in bringing the parties to the negotiating table. Moving forward, sustained diplomatic engagement will be essential to ensure that both sides adhere to the terms of the ceasefire and prisoner exchange. The reconstruction of Gaza, in particular, will require significant financial and logistical resources, as well as a coordinated effort to address the humanitarian needs of the population.
As the ceasefire takes effect and the first steps of the agreement are implemented, the world will be watching closely to see whether this fragile truce can pave the way for a more durable peace. The stakes are high, not only for the people of Gaza and Israel but also for the broader Middle East, where the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been a source of tension and instability. While the approval of this agreement is a significant achievement, its success will ultimately depend on the commitment of all parties to prioritize dialogue, compromise, and the well-being of those who have suffered the most from this protracted conflict.
