Fact Check: "Hamas ended the ceasefire because they broke the rules"
What We Know
The claim that "Hamas ended the ceasefire because they broke the rules" is rooted in the complex dynamics of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas. The ceasefire, which began on January 19, 2025, was intended to halt hostilities following a series of violent escalations, including the significant attack by Hamas on October 7, 2023, which resulted in the deaths of approximately 1,200 Israelis and the capture of 251 individuals as hostages (source-2).
The ceasefire was brokered by the United States, Qatar, and Egypt, and involved a series of stages, including the release of hostages and Palestinian prisoners (source-2). However, reports indicate that both sides accused each other of violating the terms of the ceasefire. Israel claimed that Hamas was preparing for further attacks and had refused to release hostages, while Hamas accused Israel of breaching the agreement through airstrikes and other military actions (source-2, source-5).
The situation escalated on March 18, 2025, when Israel launched extensive airstrikes, which it described as "pre-emptive strikes" against Hamas targets, effectively signaling the end of the ceasefire in practice, despite it not being formally declared over (source-2).
Analysis
The assertion that Hamas ended the ceasefire due to rule violations is partially true. Both parties have engaged in actions that could be interpreted as violations of the ceasefire terms. For instance, Israel's military actions were justified by claims of Hamas's preparations for further attacks, which suggests a defensive posture rather than a direct violation of the ceasefire by Hamas at that moment (source-2).
On the other hand, Hamas's refusal to release hostages as previously agreed upon can be seen as a breach of the ceasefire agreement. This refusal was cited by Israeli officials as a reason for resuming military operations (source-2, source-3).
The credibility of the sources reporting these events varies. The BBC and other major news outlets provide a relatively balanced view, citing official statements from both sides and contextualizing the ongoing conflict (source-2). However, some sources may exhibit bias, particularly those closely aligned with either Israeli or Palestinian narratives, which can affect the interpretation of events (source-5).
Conclusion
The claim that "Hamas ended the ceasefire because they broke the rules" is partially true. While Hamas did not formally end the ceasefire, their actions, particularly the failure to release hostages, contributed to the breakdown of the agreement. Simultaneously, Israel's military actions in response to perceived threats from Hamas also played a critical role in the ceasefire's collapse. Thus, both parties share responsibility for the ceasefire's deterioration, making the claim only partially accurate.
