A breakdown of the ceasefire agreement and the exchange of hostages and prisoners between Hamas and Israel.

The Gaza ceasefire agreement has initiated a significant hostage and prisoner exchange between Hamas and Israel, marking a pivotal moment in the ongoing conflict. Over the first six weeks of the truce, 33 Israeli hostages are to be released in phases, with corresponding releases of Palestinian prisoners by Israel.

The First Exchange
On the first day of the ceasefire, Hamas released three Israeli women—Romi Gonen, Doron Steinbrecher, and Emily Damari. In return, Israel freed 90 Palestinian prisoners, including 69 women and 21 teenage boys. Many of these prisoners were recently detained and had not yet been charged or tried.

Who Remains Held in Gaza?
At the start of the truce, approximately 97 Israeli hostages remained in Gaza. Israeli authorities estimate that about half of them are alive, though this has not been confirmed by Hamas. During the first phase of the agreement, Hamas is set to release hostages considered vulnerable, including women, children, older men, and those who are ill or injured.

Prisoners to Be Released by Israel
Israel has committed to releasing nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners in exchange for the hostages. This group includes:

• 1,167 individuals detained in Gaza during the war.
• 737 prisoners from the West Bank, Jerusalem, or Gaza, including some convicted of attacks, others held in administrative detention without charges, and members of militant groups.

The Process of Exchange
Hostages released by Hamas are handed to Red Cross officials, who then transfer them to the Israeli military at designated locations near Gaza’s borders. Palestinian prisoners released by Israel are transported to the West Bank, Gaza, or third countries, such as Egypt, with some potentially resettling in Qatar, Turkey, or Algeria.

The Broader Ceasefire Context
During the initial phase of the ceasefire, the Israeli army will withdraw from specific positions in Gaza, enabling displaced Palestinians in northern Gaza to return. A second phase is anticipated, which could involve the exchange of remaining hostages and a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, contingent on further negotiations.

The ongoing exchanges highlight the complex and fragile nature of the ceasefire. While the process offers hope for humanitarian relief, the broader political and security implications remain uncertain. Both sides face intense scrutiny from their respective populations and international observers as the ceasefire unfolds.

This exchange underscores the deep human and political stakes in the conflict, serving as a reminder of the urgent need for durable solutions to the decades-long crisis.

U.S. reaffirms unwavering support for Israel, as Trump’s administration eyes a broader Middle East peace agenda.

U.S. President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming national security adviser, Mike Waltz, has issued a firm declaration against Hamas, vowing that the militant group will never govern Gaza. Speaking on CBS’ Face the Nation, Waltz underscored the incoming administration’s unwavering commitment to Israel and its broader vision for Middle East peace through the Abraham Accords.

“Hamas will never govern Gaza. That is completely unacceptable,” Waltz stated, reaffirming the Trump administration’s stance. He warned that any attempt by Hamas to renege on the current ceasefire-for-hostages agreement would result in U.S. support for Israel to take decisive action. “If Hamas backs out or moves the goalpost, we will support Israel in doing what it has to do,” he added, emphasizing that the administration’s priority is Israel’s security and stability.

The remarks came as a ceasefire agreement in Gaza came into effect, with Hamas pledging to uphold its terms while warning that any Israeli violations could jeopardize the fragile truce. Hamas spokesman Abu Ubaida urged mediators to ensure Israel’s compliance, reflecting the fraught nature of the agreement.

Progress on Middle East Normalization

In addition to the immediate crisis in Gaza, Waltz expressed optimism about advancing a historic normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia as part of the Abraham Accords. This ambitious effort seeks to expand the circle of peace in the Middle East, building on agreements brokered during Trump’s previous tenure. Waltz described this potential deal as a game-changer for the region, offering Israel increased security and economic ties while fostering broader stability.

The Trump administration’s approach signals a dual strategy: supporting Israel’s hardline stance against Hamas while pursuing long-term peace through regional diplomacy. By tying U.S. support for Israel’s security with broader normalization goals, the administration aims to reshape the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East.

As the ceasefire holds for now, all eyes will be on whether Hamas abides by its terms and whether Trump’s administration can navigate the complex dynamics of the region to achieve lasting peace. Waltz’s message, however, leaves no doubt: the U.S. stands firmly behind Israel in its quest to ensure that Hamas will never regain political or military dominance in Gaza.

Ceasefire implementation and hostages’ release depend on Trump’s next moves

Israel’s Cabinet has approved a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal brokered through a year of negotiations involving the U.S., Qatar, and Egypt. The agreement, endorsed by President Biden in May, was finalized Saturday, shortly before Trump’s inauguration, placing the responsibility for implementation on his administration.

The deal’s initial phase involves a halt to hostilities, withdrawal of Israeli forces, increased humanitarian aid, and limited prisoner exchanges. However, subsequent phases, including full hostage release and Gaza reconstruction, remain undecided. Trump’s administration faces the task of maintaining the ceasefire’s momentum while negotiating further terms.

Prime Minister Netanyahu stated he secured U.S. guarantees to support Israel should talks falter, but skepticism persists over Trump’s commitment to long-term solutions in Gaza. Critics worry his focus on regional deals, like adding Saudi Arabia to the Abraham Accords, may overshadow the agreement’s humanitarian aspects.

The deal’s fate now depends on Trump’s ability to balance U.S.-Israel ties, pressure Hamas, and advance peace while navigating complex regional dynamics.

Negotiations for a phased truce in Gaza approach final agreement, promising hostages’ release, troop withdrawals, and humanitarian aid.

Efforts to secure a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas are nearing a critical turning point, with U.S. and Qatari officials expressing cautious optimism about an imminent deal. The proposed agreement, which has seen months of fraught negotiations, aims to halt the fighting in Gaza and address key humanitarian concerns.

The ceasefire framework envisions phased steps: Hamas would release hostages captured during its October 2023 assault, while Israel would free Palestinian prisoners. Israeli troops would begin a gradual withdrawal from Gaza, facilitating the return of displaced Palestinians and a surge in international humanitarian aid.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Qatari officials have called the negotiations the closest they’ve ever been to a breakthrough. However, significant challenges remain, particularly over Israel’s security assurances and Hamas’s agreement to the final terms.

Despite the progress, violence persists. Israeli airstrikes continued to pound Gaza on Tuesday, targeting areas like Deir al-Balah and Rafah, killing at least 15 people. The attacks underscore the fragility of the talks and the urgent need for a resolution.

Humanitarian conditions in Gaza are dire, with over 46,500 fatalities reported and most of the 2.3 million residents displaced. The United Nations has pledged to ramp up aid deliveries once a ceasefire is implemented, but access to border crossings and security concerns remain significant obstacles.

The Biden administration, in its final weeks, is intensifying diplomatic efforts to secure a ceasefire before President-elect Donald Trump takes office. Blinken has outlined a post-ceasefire plan involving international governance in Gaza, with the Palestinian Authority playing a leading role and Arab states ensuring security.

The proposed framework aims to unify Gaza and the West Bank under a future Palestinian state, a contentious point that Israel has historically opposed. Trump’s Middle East team, led by envoy Steve Witkoff, has been briefed on the negotiations, signaling potential continuity in U.S. policy.

While the ceasefire deal represents a significant diplomatic achievement, its success hinges on careful implementation and mutual trust—a tall order in the region’s volatile context. If finalized, the agreement could provide a roadmap for long-term stability and reconstruction in Gaza, but it will require unprecedented cooperation from all stakeholders to succeed.

Intelligence officials thwart bombing near Sayyida Zeinab shrine, a frequent target of extremist attacks, as Syria’s new leadership seeks stability.

Syrian intelligence officials successfully disrupted a planned Islamic State (IS) attack on the Sayyida Zeinab shrine, a prominent Shiite pilgrimage site near Damascus. State media reported the arrests of IS cell members behind the plot, marking a critical step in the new government’s efforts to counter extremist threats and reassure religious minorities.

Sayyida Zeinab has long been a target for IS, which views Shiites as infidels. The shrine has faced multiple attacks, including a 2023 motorcycle bombing that killed six people and injured dozens on the eve of Ashura, a sacred day for Shiites. This latest plot underscores the ongoing sectarian tensions that continue to plague Syria in the wake of President Bashar al-Assad’s ousting.

Syria’s new de facto rulers, led by the Sunni Islamist group Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), have taken steps to address these divides. Once affiliated with al-Qaeda, HTS has sought to rebrand itself as a more moderate force, with its leader Ahmad al-Sharaa preaching religious coexistence and stability. These efforts aim to ease fears among religious minorities, particularly Shiites and Alawites, who were closely aligned with Assad’s regime.

The thwarted attack also comes amid significant political shifts in the region. Lebanon’s caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati recently visited Damascus to meet with HTS leader al-Sharaa. This meeting suggests a potential thaw in the strained relations between Lebanon and Syria, signaling an emerging regional alignment under Syria’s new leadership.

As Syria navigates this transitional period, the successful prevention of extremist attacks will be crucial to fostering security and trust across its deeply divided society. The Sayyida Zeinab plot serves as a stark reminder of the challenges ahead, as well as the potential for renewed stability under vigilant governance.

Joseph Aoun’s election ends a 15-month presidential vacancy, breaking Lebanon’s political deadlock amid regional tensions.

After 15 months of political paralysis, Lebanon’s parliament has elected Army Chief Joseph Aoun as the nation’s president, marking a significant breakthrough in a protracted deadlock. Aoun secured the presidency during a second round of voting in parliament on Thursday, surpassing the simple majority threshold of 65 votes required to win. The announcement sparked celebrations among lawmakers, reflecting the relief of a nation desperate for political resolution.

In the first round of voting earlier in the day, Aoun fell short of the two-thirds majority needed to clinch victory, receiving 71 votes out of the 128-member parliament. However, the subsequent round lowered the bar to a simple majority, allowing Aoun to claim the presidency and bring an end to a crisis that had left Lebanon without a head of state since October 2022.

The political impasse had been fueled by deep divisions between Hezbollah and its opponents, stalling over a dozen previous attempts to elect a president. The stalemate exacerbated Lebanon’s ongoing economic collapse, with inflation, corruption, and sectarian tensions crippling the nation.

Joseph Aoun, a Maronite Christian as mandated by Lebanon’s sectarian power-sharing system, represents a figure of stability and neutrality. As army chief since 2017, he has garnered respect domestically and internationally for his leadership, particularly during the nation’s social and economic upheavals. His presidency is viewed as a move to restore confidence in Lebanon’s governance and navigate the nation through its many crises.

The international community had been pressuring Lebanon’s political factions to resolve the leadership vacuum. The urgency was heightened by a looming deadline in 17 days to deploy Lebanese troops alongside UN peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, following a fragile ceasefire after last autumn’s Hezbollah-Israel war. Aoun’s election is expected to strengthen Lebanon’s ability to fulfill its commitments in this regard and stabilize its internal security.

Aoun’s presidency signals a new chapter for Lebanon, but significant challenges lie ahead. The nation remains deeply divided, its economy in tatters, and its citizens increasingly disillusioned with the political elite. Aoun’s ability to bridge these divides and implement reforms will determine whether this moment becomes a turning point or a fleeting reprieve from Lebanon’s chronic instability.

With advanced missile capabilities, maritime disruptions, and ties to Iran, the Houthis’ growing power demands urgent international intervention.

The Houthis, a rebel group originating in Yemen, have evolved into a formidable threat to regional and global stability. Bolstered by Iranian support and access to advanced weaponry, the Houthis now wield considerable military power that extends far beyond Yemen’s borders. Middle East expert Dan Fefferman has emphasized the urgent need for an international coalition to address their expanding influence.

Originally a localized group, the Houthis have transformed into a sophisticated force with an estimated 20,000 fighters. Their arsenal now includes drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles, much of it supplied or financed by Iran. The Houthis have demonstrated their technological prowess through attacks on major oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, missile strikes targeting Abu Dhabi, and drone incursions into Israeli airspace.

The impact of their military activities is profound. Over the past year, the Houthis have launched hundreds of missiles and drones, disrupting life in major cities like Riyadh and Tel Aviv. These attacks highlight their ability to project power far beyond Yemen, unsettling not just regional actors but also global powers.

Perhaps the Houthis’ most alarming capability lies in their disruption of international shipping. Operating in the Red Sea, a critical artery for global trade, their maritime activities have obstructed shipping lanes, causing a reported 60% reduction in Suez Canal traffic over the past year. Such disruptions affect global markets, raising costs and creating supply chain vulnerabilities that ripple across industries worldwide.

Their maritime operations have also directly targeted international naval vessels, including those of the U.S., further escalating tensions and highlighting their threat to international security.

Iran’s role in supporting the Houthis cannot be understated. As Tehran’s proxy, the Houthis serve as a key instrument in Iran’s strategy to destabilize the region and challenge its adversaries, particularly Saudi Arabia, Israel, and the United States.

The Houthis’ growing strength has drawn international attention to the broader dynamics of Iran’s influence in the Middle East. Access to Russian arms and Iranian technology has allowed the Houthis to expand their reach, demonstrating how proxy groups can evolve into significant players on the global stage.

Experts like Fefferman argue that the Houthis’ activities demand a coordinated international response. “This is not just a threat to Israel. This is a threat to regional stability and international stability,” Fefferman warns.

The implications of ignoring the Houthis extend far beyond the Middle East. Disruptions in global trade, threats to energy supplies, and the risk of escalated conflicts in an already volatile region underline the necessity of action.

An international coalition, backed by regional powers and global stakeholders, could provide a multifaceted approach to curtail the Houthis’ capabilities. This would involve targeting their supply chains, countering Iranian support, and restoring stability in Yemen to undermine the group’s base of operations.

The Houthis are no longer a localized insurgency but a rising power with the capability to disrupt regional and global stability. Their advanced military technologies, maritime disruptions, and ties to Iran make them a unique and pressing threat. Addressing this challenge requires a unified international effort, as the cost of inaction will only grow with time. The world can no longer afford to ignore the Houthis.

With Assad overthrown, Syria’s fractured rebel coalition, led by HTS, struggles to navigate the complexities of peacebuilding and power-sharing.

The overthrow of Bashar al-Assad marks a historic victory for Syria’s rebel forces, but the celebrations are tempered by an uncertain future. Drawing lessons from post-conflict transitions in countries like Libya, Uganda, and Ethiopia, Syria faces the risk of internal fragmentation and renewed violence as competing factions vie for influence in the absence of a stable authority.

The Military Operations Command, the coalition that toppled Assad, has already disbanded in all but name. The dominant faction, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), led by Ahmed al-Sharaa, remains the primary force, but its own internal structure—a merger of at least four separate militias—reflects the precarious nature of alliances forged during the conflict.

Al-Sharaa’s pledge to disband all factions and integrate fighters into a national defense ministry is ambitious but fraught with challenges. History suggests that rival factions are likely to emerge, challenging HTS’s legitimacy and threatening the fragile unity of Syria’s transitional period.

Syria’s post-conflict trajectory mirrors challenges seen in Libya, South Sudan, and Uganda:

Fragmentation of Coalitions: In Libya, the National Transition Council quickly fractured into rival militias, resulting in prolonged instability. Similar dynamics could play out in Syria as smaller factions, uncertain of their place in a centralized system, switch allegiances to strengthen their positions.

Shifting Loyalties: Opportunistic realignments among militias, seen in both Libya and South Sudan, could undermine HTS’s efforts to consolidate power and create a unified defense structure.

High-Stakes National Politics: HTS’s vision for a unified state without federal regions raises the stakes for national elections, making the political game a zero-sum contest prone to violent outcomes, as demonstrated by Uganda’s post-Amin elections.

Ethiopia’s post-Derg transition attempted to devolve power to ethnic regions, providing former rebel factions with localized stakes. While imperfect, this approach mitigated some of the risks associated with centralized governance.

In Syria, however, the lack of clear ethno-territorial bases for most militias and HTS’s rejection of federalism as a political model limit the viability of such a solution. The emphasis on a unified state places immense pressure on the transitional government to navigate competing interests without devolving into renewed conflict.

While elections are a cornerstone of democratic transitions, their timing and structure can determine whether they stabilize or destabilize a nation. In Uganda, elections in 1980 reignited rebellion when one faction felt marginalized. Similarly, in Syria, elections held prematurely or without inclusive power-sharing mechanisms risk sidelining factions and provoking violent reprisals.

Syria’s post-Assad transition faces significant hurdles:

Internal Rivalries: The diverse and often overlapping interests of militias under the HTS umbrella threaten to fracture the coalition.

Uncertain Governance: The absence of federalist structures or other mechanisms to provide localized stakes may intensify competition for national power.

External Influences: Regional and international actors, including Turkey, Iran, and Russia, may exacerbate internal divisions as they seek to shape Syria’s future.

Syria’s post-war path to peace is fraught with complexities. While HTS’s leadership offers a temporary anchor, the fragmented nature of the coalition, the lack of decentralized governance, and the high stakes of national politics present significant risks of renewed violence.

Learning from past transitions, Syria’s future stability hinges on building inclusive governance structures, carefully timing elections, and addressing the underlying grievances that fueled years of conflict. Without such measures, the celebration of Assad’s fall may soon give way to a new chapter of uncertainty and violence.