As Israel's war on the Gaza Strip enters its 21st month, the question of a potential ceasefire hangs heavy in the air, shadowed by scepticism, political brinkmanship, and the suffocating reality on the ground.
In the Qatari capital, Doha, indirect negotiations between Hamas and Israel continue under Qatari, Egyptian, and United Nations mediation for a second week in a row.
While diplomats speak of "innovative mechanisms" to bridge the gaps, events unfolding in Gaza suggest that Israel's strategy to maintain war remains firmly in place, exemplified by the recent opening of the so-called "Magen Oz Corridor," a new military road slicing through Khan Younis.
For many in Gaza, such a move signals not a truce but a preparation for deeper entrenchment and prolonged conflict.
A corridor, not a concession
The Magen Oz Corridor, completed by the Israeli army in early July, effectively bisects Khan Younis from east to west, according to a press statement issued by the military.
Its strategic utility has been widely questioned, but its symbolic significance is potent.
Basim Naim, a senior official of Hamas, posted on his account on Facebook: "It's not about operational advantage. The message here is that Israel is building permanence. It’s a political statement disguised as a military manoeuvre."
He accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of deliberately derailing the process, saying, "Netanyahu has failed to present new maps for over a week, despite media reports suggesting otherwise, and is merely using negotiations as a public relations tool to ease international scrutiny."
Naim deleted his post soon after, without providing an explanation.
The corridor's opening came as the death toll surged yet again. During the past 24 hours, the Israeli army killed at least 94 Palestinians and wounded more than 250 others, most of them women and children, according to the Palestinian health ministry in Gaza.
That spike in casualties occurred amid stalled negotiations, further underlining doubts about Israel's intentions.
Days ago, Israel announced a "concentration city plan" in Rafah in the south of Gaza to house 600,000 displaced people for $US 5 billion.
Critics, including senior Israeli military officials, argue that the project could hinder hostage negotiations and entrench the conflict further.
The Israeli newspaper Maariv reported internal warnings that the plan might actually prolong the war.
Netanyahu's calculated delay?
Inside Israel, divisions are mounting between the military establishment and the political leadership. Chief of Israeli army staff Eyal Zamir has reportedly cautioned against redirecting resources toward the humanitarian city, arguing it would weaken military efforts aimed at eliminating Hamas and securing the release of Israeli hostages.
Netanyahu, for his part, has insisted that Israel does not seek to expel Gaza's population but offers them "the choice to stay or leave."
In a statement that attempted to balance domestic and international pressures, he said any ceasefire would not come "at any cost". He stressed the need for guarantees that Gaza will never again threaten Israel.
On 10 July, Hamas announced its readiness to release ten live captives under a proposed 60-day interim truce.
But the group underscored that negotiations remain "difficult," citing Israel's resistance to key demands, including the full withdrawal of its forces from Gaza, assurances of sustained humanitarian aid, and guarantees of a permanent ceasefire.
Israeli affairs analyst Esmat Mansour sees in the Magen Oz corridor a tactical ploy. "The Israeli army is playing a triple game: control of territory, targeted assassinations, and aid distribution via American intermediaries, which increasingly resemble traps," he told The New Arab.
According to Mansour, these tactics aim to manipulate negotiations and build facts on the ground that favour Israel in any future political arrangement.
"This is not just military strategy, it's political manoeuvring. Netanyahu is using time and terrain to shape the outcome," he said.
Mansour argued that Netanyahu's main concern is political survival, not military victory or post-war reconstruction.
"Netanyahu isn't afraid of prosecution; he's afraid of irrelevance. Once out of power, his entire political edifice begins to crumble," he said.
He added that Netanyahu might use the current Knesset recess to broker an interim deal, potentially paving the way for early elections.
"If he manages to secure a temporary truce and a hostage deal, he could spin it into an electoral triumph," he said.
However, such a plan comes with risks. "He can't afford to go into an election with hostages still in Gaza or Hamas undefeated. His opponents would eat him alive," Mansour added.
A narrow window for a deal
While Mansour offers a cautious assessment, Hani al-Masri, a Ramallah-based political analyst, sees grounds for hope.
"Conditions are aligning for a deal by the end of the month, driven not by goodwill, but by necessity," al-Masri told TNA.
"Netanyahu gave private assurances to US President Donald Trump that he would conclude an agreement. Trump is now applying pressure […] He needs a diplomatic win ahead of the American elections," al-Masri said.
That pressure may prove decisive. Al-Masri believes the Israeli army is increasingly convinced that the war has hit a dead end.
"Strategically, they've extracted what they can. Continuing this way is just bleeding resources," he added.
He also pointed to shifting public sentiment in Israel. "The Israeli street is tired. The families of hostages are growing louder. The mood is changing," he continued.
As for Hamas, al-Masri praised what he called their "calculated flexibility." Facing an unprecedented humanitarian crisis, the movement appears ready to consider interim arrangements that allow some relief for civilians while maintaining its political relevance, as he said.
Yet al-Masri warned that no ceasefire will hold without a broader Palestinian consensus.
"Gaza under Hamas and the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority are two separate worlds. We need a unified national leadership to rebuild trust and create a future worth fighting for," he stressed.
Ceasefire or a mirage?
While analysts debate strategy and outcomes, the people of Gaza remain in a torturous limbo.
In Jabalia, merchant Wassim Dalloul's life crumbled literally when an airstrike reduced his family's electrical appliance store to rubble.
"It was our livelihood. I inherited it from my father. One missile turned it all into ashes," he complained to TNA.
Now, Dalloul lives with his family and a dozen others in a UNRWA school classroom. "All the previous ceasefires brought new massacres. We no longer believe in any of it. But we have nowhere to go. We wait, what else can we do?"
"Every time there's talk of a truce, fear takes over. The calm is always followed by something worse. It's not peace. It's a trap. A long-term crime," he added.
In Khan Younis, civil engineer Mohammed Skaik shares a similar despair. "I don't care about politics or normalisation […] I just want a real life. To drink clean water. To cook dinner. Is that too much?" he said.
Skaik now volunteers with engineers, documenting the destruction. "No one asks us what we want. We're just numbers in a spreadsheet. Every time leaders meet, they talk about truces and deals. They never mention life," he added.
In fact, he says, "Negotiations terrify us. Not because we don't want peace, but because we know how many have died waiting for it. There are no certainties. Every scenario is on the table. And we are always the ones who pay."
As negotiations drag on, Gaza teeters between the possibility of a temporary respite or a status quo of perpetual trauma.
"The war isn't over," Mansour insists, "but the situation is shifting. If we can impose a political and popular equilibrium, we might be able to restore the dream of a national project."
Al-Masri agrees, but with a sobering reminder: "We must prepare for the day after. Not just how to stop the war, but how to rebuild, how to govern, and how to survive."
For now, Gaza waits between fragile hopes and the brutal certainty of more loss.