On the recent episode of Breaking Points, Trita Parsi, vice president of the Quincy Institute, provided a critical analysis of the current Gaza ceasefire, emphasizing its fragility and the broader geopolitical implications.

In a critical analysis, Parsi highlights the superficial nature of the recently brokered ceasefire, cautioning that it fails to address the deep-seated issues fueling the ongoing conflict. While the agreement is being celebrated by some as a significant diplomatic success, Parsi warns that it merely serves as a temporary pause in hostilities rather than a lasting solution.

Parsi elaborates on the weaknesses of the deal, which was secured under intense diplomatic efforts. He notes that its primary function is to halt immediate violence, allowing negotiations to continue in the background. However, there remains skepticism about its durability, especially given Israel’s history of violating previous ceasefires.

“Each time a ceasefire is announced, Israel seems to escalate its military actions,” Parsi remarked, referencing reports of continued Israeli attacks on Palestinian civilians even as negotiations progress. This pattern, he suggests, raises doubts about whether the current agreement can lead to any lasting peace.

Delving deeper into the broader geopolitical strategy, Parsi argues that Israel uses ceasefires as tactical pauses rather than genuine steps towards resolution. “The underlying aim for Netanyahu,” Parsi claims, “is to extend the occupation and eventually annex Gaza.” He asserts that Israel has no intention of a complete withdrawal, instead seeking to solidify its control and prepare for future military campaigns, with the current ceasefire serving merely as a temporary facade.

He emphasized that Israel has no intention of a full withdrawal and is instead looking to consolidate control and prepare for future offensives, using the ceasefire as a temporary cover.

Parsi also highlighted that U.S. pressure has been a decisive factor. He pointed out that the Trump administration had, at one point, applied sustained diplomatic pressure—something that is missing now.

Without this pressure, he warned, the cycle of violence is likely to continue. “The key to long-term peace is for the U.S. to maintain pressure on Israel and push for lasting solutions, including the recognition of Palestinian statehood,” he said.

He also touched on the risk of an Israeli instigated escalation, noting Netanyahu’s historical pattern of craving conflict to justify domestic political needs and his broader ambition to annex Palestinian land.

“Netanyahu’s long-term plan is to divert global attention from his territorial ambitions in the West Bank and move towards further land grabs,” Parsi explained.

Finally, Parsi warned that the international community’s recognition of Palestinian statehood, while symbolically significant, must be followed by concrete action. “Recognition alone isn’t enough,” he concluded.

“It must be backed by efforts to enforce international law and accountability to truly change the balance of power.”

This episode underscores that a ceasefire, especially one negotiated under the shadow of ongoing Israeli breaches, is only a fragile first step. Without sustained diplomatic pressure and a fundamental shift in regional and U.S. policy, the cycle of violence risks continuing, and hopes for a durable peace in Gaza remain distant.