Did isreal or palestine break ceasefire
Executive summary
Reporting from multiple outlets shows a contested picture: Palestinian and Gaza authorities and rights groups say Israel has repeatedly violated the Gaza ceasefire with hundreds of strikes and at least hundreds of deaths since the truce began on Oct. 10, 2025 (Al Jazeera, Amnesty) [1][2]. Israeli officials say the ceasefire has largely held, that some shootings across agreed lines or militant actions prompted targeted responses, and that a formal second phase of the truce is imminent (AP, Reuters, Times of Israel) [3][4][5].
1. What each side is claiming — competing tallies
Gaza’s Government Media Office and the Health Ministry track near-daily incidents and count at least 738 alleged Israeli “violations” of the ceasefire from Oct. 10 to Dec. 9, with some 377 Palestinians killed and 987 injured in that period, according to Al Jazeera’s summary of Gaza figures [1]. International NGOs and Palestinian submissions to the UN cite thousands of alleged violations earlier in 2025 and say continuing strikes and restrictions show the ceasefire is being undermined [6][2]. In contrast, Israeli officials frame many incidents as responses to militant fire across the agreed “yellow line” or as targeted operations and say the truce’s first phase has largely done what it set out to do, with leaders discussing a move to a second phase [3][5].
2. Evidence of strikes and civilian deaths since the truce
Independent media reporting and human-rights groups document continued lethal incidents. The Guardian and Al Jazeera describe strikes that killed civilians — including strikes the Guardian called “in violation of the ceasefire” — and Amnesty reports at least 347 Palestinian deaths after the ceasefire was announced, arguing the humanitarian situation and targeted killings demonstrate the truce has not stopped lethal Israeli actions [7][1][2]. Reuters and UN sources also note children continue to die and that the ceasefire remains fragile while forces and militia remain in proximity [4][8].
3. Israel’s account: violations by militants and a fragile “reducefire”
Israeli statements, as reported by Reuters and the Times of Israel, emphasize incidents in which forces fired on militants who crossed the ceasefire demarcation and describe actions against perceived threats in Gaza and even southern Lebanon; Israeli leaders also argue the first phase is nearly complete and that subsequent phases will require disarming Hamas and further withdrawals [4][5]. AP reporting quotes Netanyahu and U.S.-brokered plan descriptions that frame the current truce as partial and to be expanded into a formal second phase [3][9].
4. Humanitarian and legal context: ceasefire vs. “reducefire”
Several sources caution that the label “ceasefire” may be misleading. The Guardian and Amnesty characterize the arrangement more accurately as a “reducefire” that has lowered mass combat but allowed continued lethal incidents and severe restrictions on aid; Amnesty says reduced scale of attacks belies what it calls ongoing policies that imperil civilians [7][2]. UN reporting and Reuters stress that consolidation — including full Israeli withdrawal, free movement of people and goods, and an international stabilization force — remains outstanding and central to whether the truce becomes a lasting cessation of hostilities [8][4].
5. Notable incidents and temporary breakdowns
There have been moments when Israel temporarily “resumed enforcement” or carried out renewed strikes, including an incident in late October when the IDF said it would reapply the ceasefire after a night of airstrikes that Gaza authorities said killed over 100 people; media outlets reported pauses and resumptions that each side justified as responses to the other’s actions [10]. Al Jazeera’s running count of alleged violations and the Palestinian UN letters alleging over 1,000 earlier violations underscore that both episodic escalations and disputes over what constitutes a breach have been recurring features [1][6].
6. What the sources agree on — and where they diverge
All major sources agree the truce reduced large-scale offensive operations and enabled some aid flows and hostage returns, but they diverge sharply on whether the arrangement constitutes a true ceasefire: Gaza and rights groups document ongoing strikes and civilian deaths and label them violations [1][2]; Israeli and some diplomatic sources describe a fragile but functioning first phase with breaches tied to militant actions and negotiations under way for a second phase [3][4][9]. The UN and mediators warn the arrangement is at a “critical moment” and must be consolidated to prevent collapse [8][11].
7. What reporting does not settle
Available sources do not mention an independent, universally accepted tally that adjudicates every alleged incident or a single international body declaring definitively which side “broke” the ceasefire overall; disputes over definitions (what counts as a violation) and different counting methods mean universal agreement is absent [1][8]. Independent verification on the ground remains constrained by access and contesting narratives.
Bottom line: The ceasefire has reduced full-scale fighting and enabled returns of hostages, but multiple credible sources document repeated lethal incidents and strong claims by Palestinian authorities and rights groups that Israel has violated the truce many times; Israeli officials counter that incidents often followed militant breaches and that the pause largely holds as negotiators prepare a second phase [1][2][3].