After Trump’s Historic Iran-Israel Truce, Do Ceasefires Really Bring Peace?
In what former President Donald Trump is calling a “monumental win for peace,” a U.S.-brokered ceasefire between Iran and Israel has put a temporary stop to one of the region’s most dangerous flare-ups in recent years. The agreement, announced late last week, marks a rare moment of calm in a decades-long conflict marked by distrust, proxy battles, and threats of nuclear escalation.
But as the dust settles, a deeper question looms: Do ceasefires like this one actually lead to lasting peace?
So far, the silence has held. Missile launches have stopped, and both Tehran and Jerusalem have made restrained public statements since the truce took effect. Trump, who is seeking re-election in 2024, has touted the deal as proof of his ability to command global diplomacy. “This is what leadership looks like,” he declared at a rally over the weekend.
Experts, however, are more cautious.
“Ceasefires can prevent immediate bloodshed, but they rarely address the root causes,” says former U.S. ambassador Daniel Kurtzer. “In this case, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Israel’s security concerns, and regional power dynamics remain unresolved.”
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) recently reported that Iran continues to block access to key nuclear facilities. Meanwhile, Israeli defense officials remain on high alert, suggesting that this truce could be more of a tactical pause than a turning point.
For many Americans watching from afar, the deal may offer hope—but also déjà vu. Past ceasefires in the Middle East have often unraveled within weeks or months.
Whether this truce marks the beginning of true diplomacy or just delays the next confrontation remains to be seen.
