In February 2025, a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas came into force, briefly easing the intense humanitarian crisis in Gaza after months of devastating conflict. The truce was structured in three phases. The first stage was implemented and included the exchange of Israeli hostages and Palestinian prisoners during a six-week period. At this time, humanitarian aid into Gaza was permitted by Israel and displaced residents were allowed to return home. However, as the ceasefire approached its second phase—which was to involve negotiations on Gaza’s future governance—mutual accusations between Israel and Hamas mounted, each side claiming that the other had violated the ceasefire agreement. After renewed yet futile rounds of negotiation, Israel suspended the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza 2 March, a move condemned by Egypt, Qatar, and the United Nations as a violation of the ceasefire terms. A week later, Israel further escalated pressure by cutting off electricity supplies to the territory. Under mounting international pressure, Hamas offered on 14 March to release Israeli-American hostage Edan Alexander along with the remains of four other hostages. However, both Israel and the United States rejected the proposal. On 18 March, Israel launched a series of large-scale surprise airstrikes across Gaza, effectively shattering the ceasefire. Hours later, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that Israel had “resumed combat in full force” against Hamas and that the airstrikes were “just the beginning”[1] of a renewed military campaign.
Since then, Gaza has come under intense and sustained bombardment, forcing civilians to repeatedly relocate in search of safety, all while a comprehensive humanitarian blockade has remained in place. The combined impact has led to a rapidly worsening humanitarian catastrophe for the population. Israel’s actions have drawn widespread international condemnation from governments, humanitarian organisations, and civil society actors across the globe. Since the resumption of hostilities and Israel’s imposition of the humanitarian aid blockade, Sweden’s position has become increasingly critical of Israel. On 11 May, Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard stated that “an expanded military offensive involving large-scale forced displacement is unacceptable”[2]. She further warned that Israel’s continued blockade of humanitarian assistance could constitute a war crime. These recent developments—marked by the cutoff of aid since March and the escalation of military actions—have notably led even former allies of Israel to reassess their positions and issue strong public criticism.
Across the broader international community, criticism of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza has intensified, with increasingly forceful language. Within the European Union, political leaders from France, Spain, and Ireland have been at the forefront of calls for stronger EU condemnation of Israeli actions. These countries have led efforts to suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement, though efforts to reach a consensus have faced obstacles, particularly due to resistance from Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Germany, based on varying motivations. Proposals to sanction violent Israeli settlers and extremist government ministers have been raised, though implementation remains limited to individual EU member states, in the absence of a coordinated EU-wide policy. In the Arab and broader Muslim world, countries such as Qatar, Jordan, Egypt, and Turkey have issued unequivocal condemnations of Israel’s actions and have called for international accountability mechanisms. Notably, Saudi Arabia announced the indefinite suspension of normalisation talks with Israel as early as February. The Arab League has held several emergency summits, denouncing the Israeli military campaign as disproportionate and calling for urgent international intervention. In regions such as Latin America, Africa, and the Asia-Pacific, many governments have supported United Nations resolutions demanding a ceasefire and the establishment of humanitarian corridors. A number of these countries have gone further, publicly accusing Israel of apartheid and genocide, and have called for arms embargoes and action by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
Simultaneously, mass protests have erupted globally, including in cities such as London, New York, Jakarta, and Cape Town, with demonstrators demanding unimpeded humanitarian access, an immediate ceasefire and an end to the occupation. A growing number of academic institutions, labour unions, and civil society organisations have endorsed the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement. These actions have sparked intense backlash and public debate, particularly from groups defending Israel’s right to self-defense and accusing Hamas of misusing humanitarian aid and endangering civilians to further its political objectives.
The international reactions to Israel’s recent military actions in Gaza reveal that a broad consensus of global criticism has emerged, particularly in response to the blockade of humanitarian aid. However, there are notable exceptions, most significantly the United States, which continues to wield the greatest influence over Israeli policy. The return of Donald Trump to the U.S. presidency in January 2025 has marked a distinct shift in American foreign policy, including its stance on the Gaza conflict. Amid the escalating humanitarian crisis and the breakdown of the ceasefire, the Trump administration has reasserted its "maximum support" policy toward Israel, closely mirroring its 2020 approach. U.S. officials under Trump have consistently opposed ceasefire resolutions at the United Nations Security Council, arguing that such measures are biased against Israel. President Trump has also placed primary blame on Hamas for the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, accusing the group of using civilians as human shields. In response to the growing wave of international condemnation directed at Israel, President Trump has described such criticism as hypocritical and antisemitic, a stance that has provoked sharp rebukes from European and Arab leaders.
As violence continues to devastate Gaza, with daily civilian casualties and deepening humanitarian suffering, the U.S. administration has shifted its diplomatic focus toward strengthening ties with Gulf states. In mid-May, high-level visits were made to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, notably excluding Israel from the itinerary. This omission was interpreted by some observers as a subtle signal of disapproval toward Israel’s conduct in Gaza. Meanwhile, the U.S. has also attempted to mediate talks between Russia and Ukraine, though these efforts have so far failed to produce tangible results. Amid these broader geopolitical manoeuvres, there is a growing concern that Israel’s escalating confrontation with Iran could divert international attention from the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza even further. Currently, only minimal aid is entering the territory, managed by the controversial U.S-Israeli Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. The foundation has faced widespread criticism and has been linked to incidents of violence and disorder at aid distribution points. These distribution sites are few and widely dispersed, forcing desperate civilians to travel long distances—increasing their exposure to harm, insecurity, and forced displacement.
As summer begins, the crisis in Gaza continues to deteriorate, yet global attention is steadily shifting elsewhere, raising fears that the humanitarian emergency may soon be overshadowed by other geopolitical flashpoints.
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyg28wd1k3o
[2] Uttalande av utrikesminister Maria Malmer Stenergard med anledning av situationen i Gaza - Regeringen.se
