How often do ceasefires in the Middle East work?
Donald Trump says he expects the Iran-Israel truce to last forever. Our analysis of more than 2,000 truces suggests that’s optimistic
A CEASEFIRE BROKERED by Donald Trump between Israel and Iran marks the latest turn in the conflict between old enemies. On June 13th Israel launched a surprise assault on Iran, crippling its air defences, killing several of its nuclear scientists and generals, and damaging uranium-enrichment sites. America joined nine days later with “Operation Midnight Hammer", hitting Iranian nuclear facilities with bombs and missiles. By June 23rd Mr Trump had declared a “complete and total" ceasefire. He told NBC News he believed it would last “forever".
That is optimistic. Data from the Ceasefire Project, a research group, covers 2,203 declared ceasefires between 1989 and 2020. About half ended successfully or were still in effect when the study ended. A third collapsed. The rest never got going or couldn’t be judged for lack of information. Ceasefires in the Middle East have a poorer record than those elsewhere. Of the region’s 360 truces with a known end, more than half failed (see chart 1).
Only one ceasefire in the database involved Iran (an agreement in 2017 with Russia and Turkey to establish safe zones in Syria; the fighting continued and the researchers consider it a failure). Israel was involved in far more, with 77 entries in the database, many of them with Hamas. More than 30% achieved their immediate aims or were replaced by a new agreement. But none have brought lasting peace. In the current Gaza war, a ceasefire signed in January ended after two months when Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, ordered missile strikes on the strip.
Each conflict has unique circumstances that determine whether a ceasefire holds. But the researchers note that successful ones tend to have three things in common. The first is a political process to address the underlying cause of the violence. In 2023, when Israel first paused its offensive in Gaza to secure the release of hostages held by Hamas, the absence of talks on wider issues meant fighting resumed a week later. In the case of Iran, that process would almost certainly require renewed negotiations over its nuclear programme. Mr Trump has dropped talk of regime change but Iran’s hardliners have shown little sign of giving up their atomic ambitions.
The second factor is monitoring. When no outside party keeps watch, four-fifths of ceasefires collapse within a year. Independent verification may boost trust or simply signal that both sides take peace seriously. America and Qatar helped broker the Iran-Israel truce, though neither side has revealed any details of the agreement.
A third factor is the “fragility window". Ceasefires are most fragile early on. But those that make it to 100 days with fewer than 25 people being killed in fighting have a better chance of leading to lasting peace. In the hours after Mr Trump’s announcement, Israel struck missile-launchers and killed another Iranian scientist. An Iranian missile slipped through Israeli defences and hit a housing estate, killing four.
Whether Mr Trump’s ceasefire holds may also depend on changes inside Iran. The war has shifted power from clerics to a new generation of Revolutionary Guard generals. They want to revive the economy and restore national pride, but they are more combative than cautious. Their influence will shape Iran’s posture long after the bombing stops.
topics
