When people ask did Hamas break the peace treaty, they’re usually looking for a simple "yes" or "no." Honestly, the reality is a lot messier than a single broken contract. International law experts and historians will tell you that there wasn't a single, permanent "peace treaty" in place on October 6, 2023. Instead, there was a fragile, informal ceasefire—often called a tahdiya or "calm"—that had been brokered by Egypt and Qatar after the conflict in May 2021.
That distinction matters.
A formal peace treaty is a legal document signed by two sovereign states. Hamas and Israel don't recognize each other’s right to exist, so they don't sign "treaties" in the traditional sense. They make deals through middle-men. When the sun came up on October 7, that deal was obliterated.
The Fragile Architecture of the 2021 Ceasefire
To understand if Hamas broke a "treaty," you have to look at what was actually on paper—or at least what was agreed upon in the backrooms of Cairo. Following the 11-day war in 2021, a set of understandings was reached. Israel agreed to expand the fishing zone off Gaza’s coast, allow more work permits for Gazans to enter Israel, and let Qatari aid money flow into the strip. In exchange, Hamas was supposed to stop rocket fire and keep the border fence quiet.
It was working. Sorta.
By mid-2023, Israel had issued nearly 20,000 work permits. To many in the Israeli security establishment, it looked like Hamas was pivoting toward "economic governance." They thought Hamas was too busy managing a territory to risk another war.
Then came the morning of October 7.
The scale of the attack—thousands of rockets followed by a massive ground invasion—wasn't just a violation of a ceasefire. It was a total rejection of the status quo. From a legal standpoint, if you consider a ceasefire a binding agreement under international law, then yes, the answer to did Hamas break the peace treaty is an emphatic yes. They initiated a high-intensity conflict during a period of negotiated "calm."
Was There Even a Peace to Break?
Context is everything. If you talk to supporters of the Palestinian cause or Hamas spokespeople, they’d argue that there was no "peace" to break in the first place. They point to the blockade of Gaza, which has been in place since 2007. To them, the blockade is an ongoing act of war.
👉 See also: Living with the US Naval Observatory Vice President Residence: Why 1 Observatory Circle Matters
They also point to things like:
- The expansion of settlements in the West Bank.
- Increased tensions around the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.
- The daily reality of life in what many human rights organizations call an "open-air prison."
So, while there was a military ceasefire, Hamas argued that Israel had already violated the "spirit" of the deal by maintaining the siege. However, in the eyes of the international community—including the UN and most Western governments—a ceasefire is a specific agreement to stop active hostilities. Launching a surprise attack while your leadership is actively communicating with mediators about "work permits" and "economic stability" is widely viewed as a deceptive breach of faith.
The Role of Misdirection and Intelligence Failures
One of the wildest parts of this whole story is how Hamas used the appearance of following the "treaty" to hide their plans. For two years, they stayed out of smaller skirmishes between Israel and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). They let PIJ take the hits while Hamas sat on the sidelines.
Israel’s intelligence community, the Shin Bet and Mossad, fell for it. They wrote reports saying Hamas was "deterred."
This wasn't just a broken promise; it was a strategic ruse. By pretending to stick to the ceasefire, Hamas convinced Israel to lower its guard. They even went so far as to build mock Israeli settlements in Gaza to practice the raid, all while Egyptian mediators thought they were discussing long-term truce conditions.
The Legal and Moral Fallout
When a party breaks a ceasefire of this magnitude, the legal consequences are basically non-existent because there’s no international "divorce court" for non-state actors. But the political consequences are permanent. The October 7 attack didn't just break a treaty; it broke the concept of "arrangements" with Hamas.
Before this, Israeli policy—often called "mowing the grass"—was based on the idea that you could have a cycle of violence, followed by a ceasefire, followed by quiet. That model is dead.
The breach was so total that the response from Israel shifted from "restoring the calm" to "eliminating the threat." This is why the question of did Hamas break the peace treaty is so central to the current geopolitical landscape. If you can't trust the other side to keep a ceasefire, you stop making ceasefires. You start making war.
What People Often Get Wrong
A common misconception is that there was a permanent peace deal signed during the Oslo Accords that Hamas violated. That's not quite right. Hamas actually rose to power specifically by opposing the Oslo Accords in the 1990s. They were never a party to those agreements.
The "treaty" people refer to is almost always the informal 2021 arrangement.
💡 You might also like: America is Going to War: Why the Rhetoric is Surging and What the Data Actually Says
Another point of confusion: Did Israel break it first? In the weeks leading up to October 7, there were small skirmishes at the border fence and some Israeli airstrikes in response to incendiary balloons. Critics of Israel say these were violations. Supporters of Israel say they were localized responses to provocations. But none of those incidents matched the scale of a full-scale invasion.
Why It Still Matters Today
Understanding this breach is the only way to understand why ceasefire negotiations in 2024, 2025, and into 2026 have been so agonizingly slow. Trust is a non-renewable resource in the Middle East.
When the 2021 deal was shredded, it didn't just affect Gaza. It changed how mediators in Cairo and Doha have to structure future deals. Now, everything has to be verified. Everything needs guarantees. There is no more "handshake" agreement between these parties.
Actionable Insights for Following the Conflict
Staying informed about Middle Eastern geopolitics requires looking past the headlines. If you're trying to track whether new agreements will hold, keep these factors in mind:
- Watch the Mediators: Don't just look at what Hamas or Israel says. Look at the statements from the Egyptian Intelligence Service and the Qatari Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They are the ones who actually see the "treaty" text.
- Verify the Terminology: Is it a hudna (long-term truce) or a tahdiya (short-term calm)? In the region's political language, these have very different levels of commitment.
- Monitor the Crossings: The status of the Kerem Shalom and Erez crossings is usually the "canary in the coal mine." When those close or open, it’s a better indicator of the treaty's health than any televised speech.
- Check Human Rights Reports: Look at groups like B'Tselem or Human Rights Watch for on-the-ground reports on ceasefire violations from both sides, as these often go unreported in mainstream news until they escalate into major conflict.
The reality is that did Hamas break the peace treaty is a question with a legal answer (yes, they broke the ceasefire) and a deeply complex historical answer (the "peace" was never a reality for those living under blockade). Moving forward, the only way to prevent a repeat of October 7 is a move toward formal, internationally guaranteed borders—something that feels further away than ever.