Israel seizes nearly 60% of Gaza

The Gaza story right now is about territory, not just talks. Israeli forces have expanded the area they control inside Gaza to roughly 59% of the strip, even though the October 10, 2025 ceasefire was supposed to move things in the other direction. At the same time, negotiations have jammed over one question — whether Hamas disarms before or after Israel fully withdraws. So the gap is getting wider, not narrower: more land under Israeli control, no agreed path to end the war, and civilians squeezed into less space. ### What does “59% of Gaza” actually mean? It does not mean formal annexation. It means Israeli troops are holding a huge internal buffer zone, often called the “Yellow Line,” that cuts deep into the north, east, and south of Gaza. Earlier this year, reporting on Israeli military maps put that zone at about 58% of the enclave. The zone extended into the remaining roughly 40% of the territory. ### Why is that such a big deal? Because the ceasefire’s whole logic was phased de-escalation. The deal envisioned a halt in military operations, more aid, and a gradual Israeli withdrawal from populated parts of Gaza. If the military zone keeps widening instead, the agreement starts looking less like a bridge to peace and more like a frozen front line. Basically, the map on the ground is moving in the opposite direction from the diplomacy on paper. ### Where are talks stuck? On disarmament. Hamas has told mediators it will not give up weapons before phase one is fully carried out, and phase one includes Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Hamas also wants guarantees that the process leads somewhere political, not just to disarmament followed by indefinite Israeli control. Israel, for obvious reasons, wants the armed wing neutralized before accepting a full exit. That sequencing fight is now the core deadlock. ### Why does sequencing matter so much? Because each side sees the other’s preferred order as a trap. From Hamas’s view, disarming first would mean surrendering its only leverage before getting withdrawal or statehood guarantees. From Israel’s view, withdrawing first could leave Hamas armed, entrenched, and politically intact. It is the same argument as arguing over who hands over the keys first in a war where the stakes are territory, hostages, armed control, and the future of Gaza. ### Is fighting still happening anyway? Yes. Even under the ceasefire framework, strikes and shootings have continued. In the last few days, reports described Palestinians killed in separate Israeli attacks, including drone fire and gunfire in areas that were supposed to be outside direct Israeli military control. That constant low-level violence matters because it keeps proving that the ceasefire is not functioning as a real ceasefire. ### What about Hamas leadership? Hamas has kept its top structure largely intact. Khalil al-Hayya was named leader in Gaza, while Khaled Mashaal was re-elected to lead the movement abroad, with Zaher Jabarin retaining a senior role tied to the West Bank. That matters because Israel’s territorial gains have not yet translated into obvious political collapse inside Hamas. The group is still negotiating through recognizable leadership channels. ### So what changed this week? The clearest change is that the territorial reality became harder to ignore. A buffer zone that was already enormous is now being described as covering nearly 60% of Gaza, while Israeli military planning for renewed operations is reportedly complete and waiting for political approval. In other words — the talks are stalled, but the battlefield posture is still advancing. ### Bottom line This is why the story matters. The ceasefire was supposed to trade time for de-escalation. Instead, time has produced a bigger Israeli footprint, a harder disarmament dispute, and a Gaza map that looks more partitioned than pacified.