A November 22 airstrike in Gaza raises a hard question: What kind of ceasefire includes civilian deaths? A commentary on the gap between rhetoric and reality.
by Yumna Zahid Ali, Guest Commentator
On November 22, 2025, Israel carried out another airstrike on Gaza, killing more than twenty people and injuring dozens.
Tell me… what kind of “ceasefire” conducts extrajudicial killings?
Can you define a “ceasefire” for me? Because from here, it looks like a sky full of Israeli jets and the ground littered with Palestinian bodies. Should the orphans be grateful their parents were killed during a “ceasefire” and not a “war”?
The ceasefire appears to be a diplomatic fiction, maintained for political cover while military operations continue. They offer the language of peace with one hand, while the other guides a missile to its target.
In Gaza, what disgusts me is that the imbalance of power is the entire point. It is not a fight for victory, but a demonstration of total domination over a trapped and helpless population. On one side: a state military with sovereign borders, an air force, and international backing. On the other: a non-state actor embedded within, and reliant upon, a civilian population of over two million with no functional sovereignty and no exit.
Headlines highlight geopolitical schemes, while the phrase “civilian casualties” becomes a repetitive, desensitizing afterthought. For many, seeing a headline about civilian deaths now triggers a reflex to scroll further, not to learn more. The “comments section” on reports of civilian casualties is often filled with justification and whataboutism, not grief or solidarity.
Did they sign a peace treaty or a bombing permit? Because you can’t have “partial” peace when it comes to bombs. The November 22 strike is just the latest example of the world watching politics while Gaza bleeds. The international response mechanism to violence in Gaza appears path-dependent, following established political scripts that prioritize process over protection, and dialogue over decisive action to safeguard civilian lives.
Is the peace process just a feel-good term for “waiting for the next ceasefire violation”? Are we waiting for a “perfect solution” while perfectly fine with the current imperfection of dead children? Because my conscience screams that the cost of a false peace is always paid by those who never signed the treaty.
Yumna Zahid Ali is a writer and educator who spends her free time reading, analyzing literature, and exploring cultural and intellectual debates. When she’s not writing for global audiences, she enjoys reflecting on societal issues and using her voice to challenge inequities, especially those affecting women. She also loves diving into history, believing that remembering the past is an act of defiance and a way to hold power accountable.
More Editorial Viewpoints
TAGS: impact of ceasefire violations on civilian populations in Gaza, analysis of Israeli airstrikes during declared ceasefires, humanitarian consequences of disproportionate military power in Gaza, international response to Palestinian civilian casualties 2025,
ethical debate over false peace narratives in Middle East conflicts
