Israel’s Gaza “Yellow Line”: Contradictions Between Ceasefire and Territorial Control
Introduction
The current situation in Gaza reveals a stark contradiction between the declared October 2025 ceasefire and ongoing Israeli military actions, particularly regarding the “Yellow Line” division and West Bank annexation plans.
This complex scenario involves multiple layers of geopolitical maneuvering, humanitarian crisis, and international legal proceedings.
The Yellow Line Division and Ceasefire Violations
The “Yellow Line” represents a temporary boundary established under the first phase of the October 2025 ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, marking Israeli military redeployment zones.
This line extends between 1.5 and 6.5 kilometers inside Gaza from the eastern border, effectively placing approximately 47-53% of the Gaza Strip under Israeli military control.
The line cuts through densely populated areas including Shuja’iyya in eastern Gaza City, Jabalia in the north, and neighborhoods in Khan Younis and Rafah in the south.
Despite the ceasefire taking effect on October 10, 2025, systematic violations continue.
Gaza’s health authorities report at least 245-260 Palestinians killed and over 630 injured since the ceasefire began.
Israeli forces have killed Palestinians attempting to cross or approach the Yellow Line, often with minimal clear demarcation of the boundary.
The Abu Shaaban family massacre on October 18, which claimed 11 lives, occurred when family members unknowingly entered the restricted zone.
Hamas has documented 962 field violations by Israeli forces, including 116 Palestinians killed, 490 wounded, 219 aerial incursions, and continued home demolitions and land bulldozing.
Israeli military operations behind the Yellow Line include daily detonations of buildings, with the BBC verification showing Israel destroyed over 1,500 structures in the month following the ceasefire.
The UN has recorded approximately 80 violations by Israeli forces in just the first two weeks.
Trump’s 20-Point Plan: Origins and Modifications
The Trump administration’s 20-point plan, announced on September 29, 2025, emerged as the framework for ending the Gaza conflict.
However, the plan’s origins and subsequent modifications reveal significant power dynamics.
Trump initially presented a version to Arab and Muslim leaders during the UN General Assembly, but Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu secured “significant 11th-hour changes” during extensive meetings with Trump advisers Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner.
Netanyahu’s modifications fundamentally altered key provisions regarding Israeli withdrawal and Hamas disarmament.
The original proposal stated that Israeli forces would “progressively hand over Gaza territory,” but the updated version added qualifications linking withdrawal to “standards, milestones, and timeframes linked to demilitarization”.
This effectively allows Israeli forces to remain in the majority of Gaza indefinitely until conditions they help define are met.
The plan envisions splitting Gaza into two zones along the Yellow Line: a “green zone” under Israeli and international military control where reconstruction would begin, and a “red zone” remaining under de facto Hamas rule.
This division, according to U.S. officials, aims to facilitate gradual civilian movement to safe zones and erode Hamas’s control, though movement is described as “voluntary” without clear timelines.
West Bank Annexation Plans
Simultaneously with Gaza ceasefire discussions, Israel’s Knesset advanced West Bank annexation legislation in October 2025.
Two bills received preliminary approval in narrow 25-24 votes, despite opposition from Netanyahu’s own Likud party and explicit warnings from the Trump administration.
One bill proposes applying Israeli sovereignty to the entire West Bank, while another specifically targets the Maale Adumim settlement.
Far-right Israeli ministers, particularly Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, have openly advocated for annexation.
Smotrich has been systematically restructuring West Bank governance, shifting powers from military to civilian agencies to institute permanent control.
As of September 2025, Israel had demolished over 1,000 structures in the West Bank, with Israeli law reaching further into the territory.
President Trump explicitly stated his opposition to West Bank annexation, warning it would undermine his Gaza peace plan.
U.S. Vice President JD Vance called the annexation vote a “very stupid political stunt,” while Secretary of State Marco Rubio labeled it “counterproductive”.
Following this pressure, Netanyahu dropped annexation from his government’s official agenda in September 2025, though the legislative process continues.
South Africa’s Legal Actions and Palestinian Evacuations
South Africa has maintained its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), originally filed in December 2023.
The ICJ issued provisional measures in January 2024, finding it “plausible” that Israel’s acts could infringe rights protected by the Genocide Convention and ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts.
In October 2025, the ICJ issued an advisory opinion affirming Israel’s obligations as an occupying power to facilitate humanitarian assistance and work with UN agencies.
A UN Commission of Inquiry concluded in September 2025 that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza, a finding echoed by various genocide experts and human rights organizations.
The Dutch Court of Appeal in November 2025 confirmed that ICJ provisional measures establish a “serious risk of genocide” triggering states’ obligations to prevent it.
Recent mysterious flights have brought Palestinian evacuees from Gaza to South Africa, raising concerns about ethnic cleansing.
On November 14, 2025, 153 Palestinians arrived in Johannesburg from Kenya without proper documentation or coordination with South African authorities.
This followed an earlier flight on October 28 carrying 176 Palestinians.
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa ordered investigations, describing the arrivals as “mysterious”.
Israeli military body COGAT confirmed facilitating departures after receiving third-country approval, though it didn’t specify which country.
Gift of the Givers founder Imtiaz Sooliman characterized this as “a coordinated effort from Israel to carry out a process of ethnic cleansing”.
The Palestinian Embassy in South Africa condemned the flights, stating an “unregistered and misleading organization” exploited humanitarian conditions, deceived families, and collected money for irregular travel.
International Community Response
The international response reveals significant divisions. Arab and Muslim states, including Qatar, Egypt, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Jordan, issued a joint statement with the U.S. supporting the UN Security Council resolution endorsing Trump’s plan, stating it “offers a pathway to Palestinian self-determination and statehood”.
However, these same states expressed frustration with Netanyahu’s last-minute modifications to the plan.
Russia proposed its own competing UN resolution on Gaza, challenging the U.S. text at the Security Council.
The U.S. mission warned that failure to back its resolution would constitute “grave consequences” for Palestinians and amount to “a vote for Hamas, war”.
The UN General Assembly adopted a resolution in June 2025 demanding Israel immediately end the Gaza blockade, with 149 votes in favor, 12 against, and 19 abstentions.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres emphasized that any international stabilization force must have Security Council approval and legitimate mandate.
European responses varied, with some nations recognizing Palestinian statehood in 2025, prompting Israeli threats of West Bank annexation as retaliation.
The U.S. State Department rejected the ICJ’s October 2025 advisory opinion as “corrupt,” accusing it of giving UNRWA a “free pass” despite alleged Hamas connections.
Humanitarian Crisis Statistics
The humanitarian situation remains catastrophic.
Since October 7, 2023, over 69,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza, nearly half of them women and children, with more than 170,000 injured.
An estimated 10,000 bodies remain under rubble. In the occupied West Bank, over 1,050 Palestinians have been killed and more than 10,300 injured.
Famine conditions were confirmed in Gaza Governorate as of August 22, 2025, with projections to expand to Deir al-Balah and Khan Younis.
Over half a million people face catastrophic starvation conditions (IPC Phase 5), while 1.07 million face emergency conditions (IPC Phase 4).
The health ministry recorded 463 malnutrition-related deaths, including 157 children, as of October 2025.
Approximately 81% of buildings across Gaza (198,273 structures) have been damaged, with 62% totally destroyed.
At least 1.45 million people face winter without adequate shelter as Israeli authorities continue blocking entry of shelter supplies.
Only a fraction of the agreed 600 daily aid trucks are entering Gaza. Israel continues rejecting vital relief items including vehicles, spare parts, solar panels, generators, education supplies, and fresh meat.
Underlying Orchestration and Blind Eyes
The characterization of this situation as “chaos orchestrated by the US and Israel” reflects several documented realities.
The Trump administration developed its peace plan in close coordination with Israel, allowing Netanyahu to secure final modifications that substantially favored Israeli security demands over Palestinian rights.
The plan’s architect, special envoy Steve Witkoff, explicitly presented it as building on Israel’s terms, with Hamas achieving “almost nothing”.
The Yellow Line division was not clearly marked initially, leading to civilian deaths, yet Israel characterized these killings as ceasefire violations by Palestinians rather than clarity failures.
The systematic destruction of infrastructure behind the Yellow Line continues unabated, suggesting intentions beyond temporary security measures.
The international community’s response demonstrates selective engagement rather than complete blindness.
While Arab states publicly support the peace process, they privately express frustration with Netanyahu’s manipulations.
The UN and humanitarian organizations consistently document violations and issue statements, yet enforcement mechanisms remain absent.
The U.S. exercises its Security Council veto power to block resolutions critical of Israel, while simultaneously positioning itself as the sole mediator.
Trustworthy information comes from multiple corroborating sources: UN agencies (OCHA, UNRWA, WHO), international human rights organizations (Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Euro-Med Monitor), the ICJ’s legal opinions, independent journalism from outlets across the political spectrum, and on-the-ground documentation by Palestinian and international observers.
The consistency across these diverse sources—despite their varying perspectives—establishes a reliable picture of systematic violations occurring alongside rhetorical commitments to peace.
Conclusion
The current situation in Gaza, particularly regarding the Yellow Line, ceasefire plans, annexation efforts, and the broader geopolitical context, is that the conflict reflects a convergence of failed diplomacy, contested legality, unprecedented humanitarian crisis, and the strategic manipulation of international law and public opinion by powerful stakeholders.
Key Elements of the Scholarly Conclusion
Systemic Failure of Peace Initiatives
The Trump administration’s 20-point plan and subsequent ceasefire agreements have not resolved the fundamental dispute or established a sustainable path to peace.
Instead, they have entrenched Israeli military control, deepened humanitarian suffering, and exposed the limits of international mediation in the absence of genuine political will from all parties involved.
Violation of International Law and Humanitarian Norms
The ongoing military actions, destruction of infrastructure, and restrictions on humanitarian aid violate core principles of international humanitarian law and the Geneva Conventions.
The ICJ’s rulings and findings of genocide by UN commissions underscore the gravity of these violations and the urgent need for accountability.
Strategic Manipulation by Great Powers
The United States and Israel have leveraged international institutions and diplomatic processes to advance their strategic interests, often at the expense of Palestinian rights and self-determination.
The negotiation of the ceasefire and peace plans, characterized by last-minute changes and opaque decision-making, reveals the limitations of international law in constraining power.
Humanitarian Catastrophe
The conflict has created one of the most severe humanitarian crises in recent history, with catastrophic levels of death, injury, displacement, and malnutrition.
The international community’s inability to provide effective relief or enforce humanitarian principles further exacerbates the crisis and highlights the gaps in global governance.
Ethical and Moral Imperatives
The ethical implications of the conflict demand a reevaluation of international responsibility, humanitarian intervention, and the protection of civilians.
The ongoing violations and the scale of suffering underscore the need for a renewed commitment to justice, accountability, and the protection of human rights.
In summation, the scholarly consensus is that the Gaza conflict remains a complex, multifaceted crisis marked by diplomatic failure, legal violations, humanitarian catastrophe, and the strategic manipulation of international processes.
Achieving a just and sustainable resolution requires a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of the conflict, upholds international law, and prioritizes the protection and well-being of civilians.
