A ceasefire was agreed to end the 15-month Gaza war after lengthy negotiations. The deal was fast-tracked by President-elect Trump, who pushed for its completion before his inauguration. Despite the announcement, Netanyahu delayed a cabinet vote to approve the deal, accusing Hamas of attempting to extract last-minute concessions, which threatened the agreement. Eventually, he confirmed the deal was finalized and later was approved by the cabinet.

To say that Hamas miscalculated the consequences of its October 7 attack would be an oversimplification. Israel’s decision to launch a war was not unexpected; in fact, Hamas anticipated a significant military response. Khaled Mashal, a senior Hamas leader, acknowledged three months into the conflict that both the political and military leadership had learned from past wars with Israel, allowing them to anticipate the aggressiveness of Israel’s reaction. Despite attempts to avoid a ground invasion and indications of openness to a hostage-prisoner exchange, Abu Obaida, the spokesperson for Hamas’ Al-Qassam Brigades, asserted their preparedness for a prolonged war aimed at defeating Israeli forces. Hamas seemingly anticipated a full-scale assault on Gaza and was ready for a protracted guerrilla campaign, relying on hit-and-run tactics and tunnel warfare.

Initially, there was little doubt about Hamas' ability to sustain the war for years, while Israel’s objective of eliminating the group was widely seen as unrealistic. Thereafter, Hamas demonstrated some flexibility in negotiations but remained committed to continuing to fight, while Israel remained steadfast in its goal of dismantling Hamas. Until a few weeks before the ceasefire agreement, Hamas was still showing relative flexibility, while Netanyahu vowed anew that he wouldn't end the war.

As a deal has been struck and on the edge of implementation, some important questions need to be answered. What was the bill of the 15-month war? And who won it?

Military capabilities and handling war repercussions

Hamas` arsenal allows it to engage Israeli forces within the framework of its tactical warfare strategy. Its weaponry comes from multiple sources, having spent decades cultivating relationships with various actors who facilitate arms smuggling, with Iran serving as a primary supplier. Additionally, Hamas' Al-Qassam Brigades manufacture weapons and missiles locally, often within underground tunnel networks. Estimates of Hamas' rocket stockpile vary significantly, ranging from 8,000 to 30,000. However, these numbers fluctuate due to heavy usage in the initial months of the war and the group's capacity to replenish its arsenal amid ongoing conflict. Since October 7, Hamas has reportedly launched 9,500 rockets. Based on available data and analysis, it may have depleted nearly all its missile reserves, or at a minimum, lost at least 30% of its stockpile.

Ironically, Israel itself has inadvertently contributed to Hamas' arsenal. Unexploded Israeli ordnance from past airstrikes over the last 17 years has become a key source for Hamas, which repurposes and recycles these munitions. Estimates suggest that up to 15% of the total ordnance fired at Gaza during this war—approximately 12,750 tonnes of explosives—could be accessible for reuse by Hamas. Despite indications that Hamas has suffered significant losses in its missile arsenal, the rate of rocket fire has slowed since January 2024. However, Hamas can still acquire weapons, though tactical considerations may influence when and how they are deployed. Beyond rockets, Hamas has developed anti-tank weaponry, including explosive devices and shells used against Israeli armored vehicles, such as Merkava tanks. These weapons have proven effective in ambushes, traps, and close-range assaults on Israeli troops and vehicles. Additionally, the Ghoul sniper rifle, a domestically produced weapon with a two-kilometer range, has been utilized since the 2014 war to target Israeli soldiers.

The Al-Qassam Brigades consist of 24 battalions, though the exact size of their forces remains undisclosed. Hamas is estimated to have up to 40,000 fighters. While Israel claimed to have eliminated 17,000 Hamas fighters at a certain point, there was no verifiable evidence to confirm this figure. Despite potential losses, thousands of new recruits have joined Hamas during the conflict. In light of the ceasefire deal, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stated that Hamas has replenished its ranks with nearly as many new fighters as those killed. Coordination among various armed factions has been pivotal in enhancing functionality on the battlefield. Military analyst Fayez al-Duwairi highlighted that the formation of a joint operations room between Al-Qassam Brigades and Al-Quds Brigades (Islamic Jihad's military wing) has advanced their cooperation from the planning stage to the execution phase.

Hamas leaders have repeatedly vowed to wage a war of attrition creating severe damage to Israel. In December, the Israeli Knesset approved an increase in the budget ceiling, granting the government an additional $9 billion for war expenditures. Meanwhile, the broader economic toll of the war cannot be overlooked, where it has reached $67 billion.

Although earlier assessments considered Hamas capable of sustaining the conflict due to its military tactics, acquired weaponry, and ideological commitment to martyrdom, the group has suffered significant exhaustion and weakening. This raised questions about its long-term ability to maintain operations. However, Hamas relentlessly was rebuilding itself, showing no signs of withdrawing from the fight even in the least controlled areas in the northern part of the Strip. Thousands of Israeli soldiers have been killed and injured during the war. Official release from the Israeli government indicates that more than 800 soldiers have lost their lives in Gaza.

Tools in Hand, Hurdles Ahead

Hamas has engaged in psychological warfare, employing tactics similar to those used by the Israeli government when addressing Palestinians in Gaza and citizens of rival states like Iran and Lebanon to pressure both militant groups and governments. Hamas has directed messages at the Israeli public, highlighting the potential repercussions of their government’s actions. The goal is to fuel political instability and revive mass protests against Netanyahu, over previous issues such as corruption charges, judicial reforms since the start of his sixth term, and currently the handling of hostages—all of which have placed significant strain on the Israeli government. By intensifying these pressures, Hamas aimed to force major concessions or even threaten the government's collapse, which would have shifted the war course.

Despite these efforts, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, who has held office for 17 years, has sought to maintain control over the 15-month-long war by securing external support while managing internal challenges. At the onset of the war, he faced resistance from protesters, political opposition, the military, and intelligence agencies yet, he remained reliant on far-right coalition partners to sustain his government. Netanyahu successfully maneuvered through these obstacles, stabilizing his position and extending the conflict to safeguard his administration.

Nevertheless, the dynamics have shifted with Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. presidential election. Even before assuming office, Trump actively pushed for a ceasefire deal, signaling the potential changes in the U.S. position representing increasing pressure. Balancing between external and internal trends became a difficult job. Far-right cabinet members Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, whose parties hold 13 seats in the Knesset, threatened to withdraw their support due to the ceasefire deal. While Ben-Gvir has strictly loudly expressed his opposition to the deal, calling Smotrich to join him, the latter seems to be swayed at the moment to support it, with promises for military operation resumption later in Gaza. Ben-Gvir walked the talk, waved his resignation from cabinet with his party members, and withdrew from the coalition following the ceasefire deal approval. Thus, setting the collation with a marginal majority at 62 out of 120 total seats. Meanwhile, Netanyahu expressed the possibility of war recommencement in Gaza if deemed necessary, leaving the interpretations wide open about what is "necessary."

Assessing the War’s True Cost (so far)

The agreement outlines three phases to be carried out over 18 weeks, with each phase lasting 6 weeks. By the end, all hostages and potentially hundreds of Palestinian prisoners will be released. Humanitarian aid will be allowed, and Israeli forces will fully withdraw. While the final phase holds much obscurity, it aims to end the Gaza blockade and begin reconstruction, with international monitors overseeing compliance and the future governance of Gaza.

Israel has been running amok ever since October 7 killing over 45,000 Palestinians, displacing 2.1 million (accounting for 91% of Gaza's population), and causing over $18 billion cost of damage in infrastructure. Hamas’s leaders insisted repeatedly that the October 7 decision was necessary. Amid deal reaching, Khalil al-Haya, a Hamas temporary committee member, expressed that the people of Gaza “will not forget and will not forgive.”

The question remains who ultimately emerged victorious in the war? Asymmetric wars have different rules in indicating the winning actor. The weaker part — here in this case Hamas — had to maintain its survival, while Israel had to grab a military victory. The terms of the deal reveal that Hamas had the final say. Nevertheless, Gaza and Hamas have suffered immense losses.

Despite overcoming the previous challenges and setbacks during the negotiations, there remains a significant risk that a disagreement could arise, potentially halting the truce's implementation at any given time.