The recently brokered cease-fire deal in the Gaza conflict, which came about through extensive diplomatic efforts involving the United States, Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey, has elicited a generally positive, though nuanced, response from the U.S., the U.N., the EU, and key Arab nations.

The proposal, a multi-phased plan, aims for an immediate cessation of hostilities, a complete exchange of hostages and prisoners, a gradual Israeli withdrawal from agreed-upon lines in Gaza, and the eventual formation of a new, non-Hamas-led governing structure in the enclave.

The varying degrees of support, along with specific concerns from each entity, illustrate the intricate geopolitical landscape of the region.

The United States' Position

The United States, under President Donald Trump, has taken a position of strong ownership and endorsement of the cease-fire proposal, which he personally announced as a "Strong, Durable, and Everlasting Peace." The deal, particularly its initial phase, is seen as a major diplomatic breakthrough for the administration.

Key components of the U.S. position include:

• Active Broker and Guarantor: The U.S. played a central role in mediating the agreement alongside Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey. President Trump publicly hailed the agreement, emphasizing his administration's commitment to seeing it through.

• Initial Focus on Hostage Release and De-escalation: The immediate priority for the U.S. was the release of all hostages held by Hamas, which formed the cornerstone of the first phase. The U.S. signaled its intent to deploy around 200 troops to Israel to support the monitoring and civil-military coordination of the cease-fire, while explicitly stating they would not enter Gaza.

• Post-Conflict Governance and Disarmament: A critical, albeit controversial, element of the U.S.-brokered plan is the establishment of a new governing mechanism in Gaza that excludes Hamas and the eventual disarmament of the group. U.S. officials and allies see the resolution of the "day after" as a precondition for Israel's full withdrawal and lasting peace. However, a senior Hamas official has already stated that the demand for Hamas's disarmament is "out of the question and not negotiable," signaling a major obstacle for the deal's later phases.

• Economic Support and Reconstruction: The U.S. has pledged involvement in the reconstruction of war-torn Gaza, with President Trump suggesting that "very rich countries" in the region would be funding the effort, with U.S. assistance to ensure its success and peaceful maintenance.

In essence, the U.S. supports the plan as the most viable path to end the conflict and is acting as its primary international guarantor, though its path is complicated by the differing interpretations of the final-stage objectives by the parties involved.

The United Nations' Position

The United Nations' position is characterized by an urgent call for the deal's full, good-faith implementation, with a primary focus on the humanitarian imperative and the long-term goal of a two-state solution.

The U.N.'s stance emphasizes:

• Full and Good-Faith Implementation: UN officials, including the Human Rights Chief Volker Turk, have urged all states and parties to collectively ensure the cease-fire plan is implemented "in good faith." The agreement is seen as a "vital opportunity" to stop the "carnage and suffering."

• Urgent Humanitarian Access: The U.N. is intensely focused on the immediate lifting of all restrictions on life-saving humanitarian aid to Gaza. U.N. relief agencies have comprehensive plans to scale up aid delivery immediately, targeting food, nutrition, health, and water services for millions of people, and stressing the need to avert famine. This also includes the necessity of identifying and removing unexploded ordnance to ensure the safety of aid workers and returning civilians.

• Long-Term Political Solution: While welcoming the initial cease-fire, the U.N. maintains that the ultimate goal must be "fulfilling the Palestinian people's right to self-determination and ensuring Palestinians and Israelis can live in peace and security," consistent with the principle of a just and sustainable two-state solution.

• Accountability and Transitional Justice: U.N. representatives have called for a process of transitional justice that includes accountability for serious rights and humanitarian law violations committed during the conflict.

The U.N.'s role is centered on both the immediate humanitarian response and ensuring the diplomatic momentum leads to a comprehensive, politically resolved peace, and not just a temporary pause in fighting.

The European Union's Position

The European Union and its member states have generally welcomed the cease-fire agreement as a breakthrough for peace and humanity, but their statements also underscore a cautious commitment to its successful implementation and the necessity of a two-state solution.

Key aspects of the EU's position are:

• Welcome and Cautious Support: EU leaders welcomed the agreement as an "important step" but stressed that the situation remains precarious and that the terms must be fully respected by all parties. They welcome the release of hostages as a crucial step towards peace.

• Commitment to the Two-State Solution: The EU unequivocally reaffirms that a viable two-state solution—with Israel and a Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security—remains the only path to lasting stability. Some member states, such as Spain, have actively pushed for the recognition of the State of Palestine to advance this progress.

• Ready to Contribute to Reconstruction and Governance: The European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, has voiced full support for the deal and pledged that Europe is ready to contribute significantly with financial support for the reconstruction of Gaza and support for the reform and strengthening of the Palestinian Authority's governance. They intend to be an active force within the Palestinian Donors Group.

• Upholding International Law: The EU continues to stress the importance of all parties respecting international law. The EU has previously taken steps, such as proposing the suspension of certain trade-related provisions with Israel and sanctioning extremist Israeli ministers and violent settlers, in response to human rights concerns and breaches of international law.

The EU's stance is one of guarded optimism, leveraging its political and economic influence to ensure compliance, deliver aid, and push the process toward a comprehensive political resolution.

Arab Nations' Position

Arab and Muslim nations, particularly the key mediators—Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey—have played a vital role in bringing the cease-fire to fruition and have broadly welcomed the agreement. Their position is a mix of appreciation for the diplomatic effort and a firm focus on the core Palestinian demands.

The collective Arab nations' response highlights:

• Appreciation for Mediation: Nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE have specifically praised the "effective role of U.S. President Donald Trump and the mediation efforts exerted by the brotherly states of Qatar, the Arab Republic of Egypt, and the Republic of Türkiye" in reaching the agreement.

• Focus on Withdrawal and Humanitarian Relief: They view the deal as a critical "basis for urgent work to alleviate the humanitarian suffering" and to achieve the complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. They have also stressed the necessity of concerted efforts to deliver sufficient and immediate humanitarian aid to end the famine.

• Support for Post-War Governance and Palestinian Unity: A joint statement by several Arab and Muslim countries welcomed Hamas's stated willingness to hand over the administration of Gaza to a transitional Palestinian administrative committee of independent technocrats. They also called for the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza and the unification of Gaza and the West Bank.

• Commitment to the Two-State Solution: Arab nations reiterate their joint commitment to a just peace based on the two-state solution. Despite some quiet security cooperation with Israel revealed in leaked documents, publicly, Arab leaders have maintained a strong stance condemning the scale of the war in Gaza.

• Potential for Stabilization Force: The U.S. plan calls for Arab states to potentially participate in an international force to help oversee the cease-fire and train a new Palestinian police force. While they have signaled support for a mechanism that "guarantees the security of all sides," they have been cautious about publicly committing to deploy military forces, which remains a sensitive point.

In summary, Arab nations are invested in the deal's success, particularly for the humanitarian relief and to advance Palestinian statehood, but their support is tied to the full, verified implementation of a complete Israeli withdrawal and the establishment of a unified Palestinian administration.

The cease-fire proposal represents a momentous, albeit fragile, pause in the conflict. While the U.S., the U.N., the EU, and Arab nations share a common goal of ending the immediate violence and humanitarian crisis, their long-term interests diverge, especially concerning the future governance and disarmament of Gaza, underscoring the formidable challenges that lie ahead in transitioning from a temporary truce to a durable and lasting peace.