Jan. 19 marked the first day of a long-anticipated ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war that began over 15 months ago. The attack on Oct. 7, 2023 left 1,200 Israelis dead and over 240 captured by Hamas. Since then, more than 45,000 Palestinians have been killed as a result of Israel’s retaliation, along with hundreds more Israelis.
From the early days of the conflict, the urgency for a ceasefire became clear for both sides, with the foremost goals of the release of the Israeli hostages and efforts to aid the Palestinian population devastated by the war.
The ceasefire, brokered by Qatar, the United States, and Egypt, began Sunday morning with the release of three hostages: Romi Gonen, 24, Doron Steinbrecher, 31, and Emily Damari, 28. In return, Israel released 90 Palestinian prisoners. The ceasefire agreement outlines three distinct stages, each with specific goals.
The first stage involves a complete ceasefire along with the release of 33 Israeli hostages over the next six weeks, as well as the release of 1,700 Palestinian prisoners. This stage will also involve distributing humanitarian aid to Gaza and efforts to reestablish essential infrastructure such as hospitals and medical clinics. The second stage will consist of the release of the remaining hostages as well as the withdrawal of all Israeli troops from Gaza. The third and final stage consists of the return of the bodies of all deceased Israeli hostages and a formed plan for the reconstruction of Gaza.
If the ceasefire is upheld to the third and final stage, the reconstruction would be an enormous project, with the United Nations estimating the cost could reach up to $50 billion. Even with that funding, which alone would be a feat to obtain, it could take hundreds of years to restore Gaza to its prior growth trend.
The ceasefire agreement was established in the final days of Biden’s presidency. During remarks given on Jan. 19, Pres. Biden took credit for the negotiation, suggesting it was in response to a plan he outlined in May 2024. While Biden reflected that the road to this deal has been long and arduous, he expressed hope for the region’s future. His words called for “a credible path to a state of their own” for the Palestinian people and “the future normalization and integration of Israel with all of its Arab neighbors.”
The early days of the ceasefire saw many bittersweet returns. Thousands of Israelis gathered in Tel Aviv’s ‘Hostage Square,’ singing, dancing, and celebrating the release of Gonen, Steinbrecher, and Damari. The Israeli Defense Force shared footage of the three women being handed off to the Red Cross, as well as the reunion between them and their mothers. Meanwhile, the release of Palestinian detainees from Ofer Prison, located in the occupied West Bank, sparked celebrations in the streets. Many Palestinians also began to make their way back to their homes, 90% of which have been severely damaged or destroyed.
Upon returning to Harvard’s campus for the spring semester, it is hard to anticipate any prevailing sentiment among the student body and the University. The University has historically had many outspoken student groups representing both ends of the conflict.
“I am all for the hostage deal,” Alex Bernat ’25, Co-President of Harvard Chabad and outspoken advocate for Israel, stated in an interview with the Independent. While Bernat’s primary concern is the return of the Israeli hostages, he stressed “the utmost importance that this ends without Hamas in control of Gaza.” He argued that this action would maintain peace in the region and “better the lives of those living in the Gaza Strip as well, as they could have leaders more focused on development and economic opportunities.”
Following the ceasefire and the inauguration of President Donald Trump on Jan. 20, Harvard also adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism. This definition condemns blatant hatred against Jewish people as well as certain criticisms of the state of Israel, namely “the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity,” as defined by IHRA. This includes “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor” as well as “drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.” This definition was adopted as part of a settlement for two Title VI lawsuits claiming that the University was not doing enough to protect Jewish students from antisemitism.
The introduction of this definition has not been without controversy. Just days after its adoption, political scientist Jay Ufelder resigned as program director of Harvard Kennedy School’s Nonviolent Action Lab, citing concerns over free speech concerning his personal views on the conflict as reasons for his departure. The Harvard Undergraduate Palestine Solidarity Committee responded to this in an Instagram post that read, “Rather than listening to wide-supported demands to divest from companies directly complicit in genocide, the university is doubling down on its commitment to draconian measures against organizers. But that will never stop our solidarity with Palestine.”
In the wake of these recent developments, it is unclear what the coming weeks and months will hold both geopolitically and on campus. Will the ceasefire usher in a longer-lasting peace, or will it remain a temporary pause in the fighting? How will Harvard students respond upon returning to campus for the new semester? While these questions remain unanswered, the coming months are likely to offer greater clarity, revealing the broader implications of these events.
Mia Wilcox ’28 (mwilcox@college.harvard.edu) writes News for the Harvard Independent.