Explainer: Will Egypt summit pave way for peace in Gaza and Middle East?

Egyptian Red Sea resort city Sharm el-Sheikh is preparing to host an international summit on Monday to strengthen the Israel-Hamas ceasefire and promote a broader Middle East peace process.

The summit comes as Egypt works to maintain the Gaza ceasefire and finalize an agreement to end the war, promote peace and stability in the Middle East, and open a new chapter for regional security and reconstruction, the Egyptian Presidency stated on Saturday.

The meeting will be co-chaired by Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and U.S. President Donald Trump, with leaders from over 20 countries participating, according to the statement.

It follows a three-day ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, which took effect on Friday after intensive negotiations in Sharm el-Sheikh involving delegations from both sides and mediators from Egypt, Qatar, Türkiye, and the United States.

During the initial phase of the plan, Israeli forces will withdraw from Gaza City, parts of Khan Younis and Rafah, and sections of Beit Lahia and Beit Hanoun. Meanwhile, five border crossings are expected to open for humanitarian aid. The agreement also includes the release of hostages and prisoners.

Main objectives

Palestinian political analysts believe the summit mainly aims to reinforce the truce, establish mechanisms for reconstruction, and develop a political pathway that could lead to broader regional stability.

Gaza-based political analyst Hussam al-Dajani stated that the Sharm el-Sheikh summit "is mainly intended to consolidate the ceasefire and provide guarantees that the war will not recur." He added that the discussions are also expected to cover Gaza's reconstruction and regional security cooperation.

Despite the positive atmosphere surrounding the summit, al-Dajani doubted whether it would address the root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"Any sustainable solution depends on the political will of President Trump and the international community," he said. "Without genuine determination to end the occupation, any settlement will remain temporary."

He noted that the war had left Israel under increasing international isolation, "which might encourage stronger global efforts to change the situation."

Prospects and limitations

Ramallah-based political analyst Jihad Harb expressed doubt that the summit could result in a comprehensive peace deal.

"The summit is mainly focused on solidifying the ceasefire and pushing efforts toward a broader agreement that might include the release of Israeli detainees," he told Xinhua.

"The current circumstances are not conducive to achieving lasting peace in the foreseeable future," Harb said. "The proposed paths diverge between the U.S. plan and international initiatives based on the two-state solution."

He said that the U.S. proposal remains vague, especially regarding the structure and sovereignty of a future Palestinian state.

Echoing Harb's view, al-Dajani said, "The U.S. plan does not specify the legal and political nature of the Palestinian state, clarity on which is essential to prevent future clashes."

The experts agreed that meaningful progress would require a clear U.S. stance and effective international pressure on Israel, whose current government continues to reject the establishment of a Palestinian state.

According to Harb, if the summit successfully stabilizes the truce, it could help reduce regional tensions involving Israel, Lebanon, Iran, Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen.

However, he warned that "failure would likely lead to renewed escalation and possibly wider conflicts in the region."

U.S. role and Arab reactions

Ramallah-based political analyst Esmat Mansour believes that Washington's involvement in the summit reflects its broader strategic goal of reasserting its influence in the Middle East.

"The United States is trying to reposition itself and reinforce Israel as a key regional partner," Mansour told Xinhua. "U.S. engagement is primarily aimed at protecting Israel after its international isolation, but this will not succeed unless accompanied by a serious plan to end the occupation," he said.

The U.S. initiative has received cautious support from several Arab countries, particularly Gulf states, which see the ceasefire as a step toward regional de-escalation.

Yet, Mansour emphasized that ongoing Arab engagement largely depends on Washington's credibility in handling the Palestinian issue.

"The U.S. efforts have been generally welcomed, but they tend to focus on satisfying Israeli concerns rather than ensuring balanced outcomes for all parties," he said.

"The lack of a unified Palestinian stance remains a major challenge for the summit's success." In Gaza, Hamas expressed hope that the summit would reaffirm the ceasefire and prevent any renewed military operations.

Hamas spokesman Hazem Qassem told Xinhua that Hamas expects "the summit to contribute to stabilizing the situation and facilitating relief and reconstruction efforts following the massive destruction caused by the war." For many Palestinians, the success of the summit depends on whether international actors will move from verbal commitments to tangible actions that improve living conditions and support reconstruction in Gaza.

Cautiously optimistic about the outcome, Palestinians hope this summit will start a genuine political process that ends the cycle of war and opens a path to peace for Gaza and the entire region, said Mohammed Awad, a Gaza citizen.