CIVICUS discusses the Gaza ceasefire and prospects for lasting peace and self-determination of Palestinians with Patrycja Grzebyk, associate professor of International Law at the University of Warsaw, Poland.

After two years of devastating violence and mass human rights violations, Israel and Hamas began implementing a ceasefire agreement on 10 October. Within days, Israel breached the truce, killing close to a hundred Palestinians and restricting aid deliveries, claiming Hamas had failed to return hostage bodies promptly and attacked Israeli soldiers. Hamas denied these accusations, maintaining that Israel was manufacturing pretexts to continue violations. It remains to be seen whether the current situation will lead to lasting peace, self-determination for Palestine and accountability for human rights crimes.

What makes this ceasefire different from previous ones, and how is the international community working to ensure compliance?

This ceasefire came after months of devastating violence and a level of international concern we hadn’t seen before. What really sets this effort apart is the role of the USA, whose direct involvement immediately raised expectations. Because of its leverage over Israeli authorities, many see it as the only one capable of pushing Israel to accept a lasting truce.

The political environment is also very different from earlier attempts. United Nations (UN) bodies have increased scrutiny, raising the possibility Israeli actions might amount to genocide. At the same time, there’s been a push in the UN Security Council for the UN to take a more active role. Altogether, these dynamics created the sense that the world could no longer look away from the scale of destruction in Gaza and a meaningful shift was finally possible.

For now, the USA remains the main guarantor of compliance, but other states also play a role. Their public condemnation of violations, their insistence on respect for international law and their diplomatic pressure all help maintain scrutiny. This doesn’t only influence Israel and Hamas; it also affects the USA, which is sensitive to accusations it’s overlooking breaches of international humanitarian law. The wider international reaction helps keep all involved accountable.

What are the main obstacles preventing humanitarian aid reaching Gaza?

Humanitarian access has been a major issue since the start of the current conflict. Israel repeatedly restricted cooperation with the UN and aid agencies, at times imposing a full blockade. These restrictions prompted the International Court of Justice to intervene, both through an advisory opinion and in the South Africa v Israel case.

The ceasefire has improved access, but not enough. Aid is still far below what people need, and key supplies remain restricted. The biggest concern is that Israel continues to threaten to halt aid if Hamas doesn’t cooperate. Turning humanitarian assistance into a bargaining chip is extremely dangerous. If this becomes accepted practice, it risks setting a precedent for other conflicts. Aid must remain neutral and unconditional. States should not be allowed to weaponise it.

What mechanisms exist to ensure accountability for violations?

There are two levels to consider: responsibility of states and responsibility of individuals.

On state responsibility, Palestine could seek reparations from Israel, and Israel could try to seek reparations if it argued Hamas’ actions were attributable to the Palestinian state. This is legally complicated and politically sensitive. And at present, there’s no international court with the mandate to enforce such claims, although one could be created if there was enough political will.

As for Hamas, its organisational structures are now severely weakened, making collective accountability difficult. In practice, many states already treat it as a terrorist organisation, which has its own consequences.

Individual accountability is where we’re more likely to see progress. National courts bear the primary responsibility for prosecuting war crimes. If they fail to act, the International Criminal Court can step in, as it has jurisdiction over crimes committed in Palestine and by Palestinian nationals in Israel. The arrest warrants issued last year were an important signal that international justice is moving, and more warrants are likely to follow.

What stands in the way of establishing a stable Palestinian government in Gaza?

The level of destruction in Gaza is overwhelming. Nothing can move forward until basic humanitarian needs are addressed: food, medical care, shelter and water. Without these, people simply cannot rebuild their lives.

Security is the next challenge. Gaza cannot be reconstructed under the constant threat of renewed military action. Neutral external forces may be needed to create a stable environment.

Then comes reconstruction itself. Without long-term investment, poverty, trauma and hopelessness will create conditions for future violence.

A legitimate government can only emerge once these foundations are in place. Free elections require freedom of expression, functioning institutions, safety and time. Palestine hasn’t held free elections for many years. The international community already largely recognises Palestinian statehood; it now needs to support the creation of democratic institutions capable of genuinely representing Palestinians. This is a long-term process. It will take years, not months.

Does the ceasefire open a real path towards Palestinian self-determination and lasting peace?

It’s too early to say whether it opens a genuine path, but it absolutely should. The right to self-determination is a core principle of international law, and all states have an obligation to help ensure it’s respected. That means the world must pay close attention to what happens next.

Self-determination isn’t only about choosing leaders. It also requires control over natural resources. For decades, Palestinians have not been able to benefit fully from their land or waters, including offshore resources currently exploited by Israel. These should support Palestinian development if independence is to be meaningful.

A ceasefire is only a starting point. Whether it leads to accountability, justice and real self-determination will depend on sustained international pressure and a commitment to rebuilding Gaza in a way that allows Palestinians to shape their own future.