- We The 66
- Posts
- 🌊 The Gaza War: The Roca Deep-Dive
🌊 The Gaza War: The Roca Deep-Dive
How a ceasefire ended and a deadly new phase of the Gaza War began

Did someone forward you this? Subscribe here free!
By Max Frost
We’re running a three-part series this week on the current state of the war in Gaza. Today is part one: Back to War.
On the night of March 18, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a declaration: “From now on, negotiations will only take place under fire.”
Airstrikes proceeded to pummel the Gaza Strip, ending a two-month ceasefire and filling what remained of Gaza’s hospitals with casualties, including up to 400 fatalities (the Hamas-controlled health authority’s figure).
This onslaught, Netanyahu said, was “just the beginning.”

In the months since, the war in Gaza has entered a new phase that shows no signs of stopping.
On the one hand, Israel is vowing to reoccupy the Gaza Strip and eradicate Hamas regardless of the toll; on the other, Hamas continues to refuse disarmament or the release of the 58 remaining hostages, 20-23 of whom are presumed alive.
In a three-part series this week, we’re looking at why the ceasefire ended, what has happened since, and what the Palestinian people’s fate may be in Gaza.

The January–March 2025 ceasefire was born of painstaking diplomacy and desperate circumstances. Beginning on January 19, it halted months of fighting and included a series of hostage-prisoner exchanges between Israel and Hamas.
Hamas, the Islamist militant group ruling Gaza, released 33 Israeli hostages – mostly older captives and women – over several rounds, while Israel freed hundreds of Palestinian detainees in return. Critical humanitarian aid was allowed into Gaza for the first time in months, and Israel’s military even began a phased pullback from parts of the enclave.
Mediators from the US, Egypt, and Qatar had crafted an ambitious three-stage deal: Eventually all hostages held by Hamas would be released, the war would formally end, and Gaza would start a years-long reconstruction. And, for a few weeks, the guns fell silent, and life-saving supplies trickled in.
Yet even during the truce, tensions simmered. Each side accused the other of bad faith. Israel complained that Hamas was slow to provide lists of hostages for each exchange and alleged that militants violated the spirit of the deal by using released captives for propaganda. Hamas officials, in turn, charged that Israeli forces continued conducting lethal raids despite the ceasefire. On February 10, Hamas temporarily halted hostage releases, saying Israel had broken its promises; under US and Egyptian pressure, the swaps soon resumed.
By late February, however, the process hit a wall. Israel refused to release a final group of 620 Palestinian prisoners scheduled under the deal, citing “repeated violations by Hamas” during the truce. Mediators scrambled to salvage an extension of the ceasefire into a second phase, but trust between the parties was eroding.
The rest of this report is for paid subscribers, who fund our journalism. If you start a two-week free trial today, you’ll be automatically entered to win a free year. Once you sign up, you can access all of our articles here!

Editor’s Note
Thank you for reading, and to our new readers, thanks for joining We The 66. In this newsletter, we aim to set aside bias and fear and cut through the noise, especially on polarizing topics like this one. We hope you learned something new and look forward to sharing part two tomorrow. If you have thoughts, please reply with them here.
If you’re interested in reading more of our reports, find our latest below:
And a couple replies to yesterday’s story on US-Iran nuclear negotiations:
Greg from New Jersey wrote:
Trump should have never pulled out of the Iran deal. Obama and the EU getting Iran to agree to an enrichment level of 3.67%, far below the 90% needed for a nuclear weapon, was huge. Iran was complying, and there was no need to renege on it.
But now the US is poking at a bear, driving Iran further away. We do need to prevent Iran from Nuclear weapon capabilities, but Trump has painted himself into a corner here. If he's able to get Iran to agree to a 0% enrichment level, that would be a big win. Unfortunately, I don't think Iran will ever agree to that.
And Daniel wrote:
Your assessment of natural uranium as a "not very useful fuel" is inaccurate. The Canadian CANDU reactor was designed to run off of natural uranium and has been doing so successfully for over 60 years.
This would be a viable option for Iran to have nuclear energy without the potential for nuclear weapons since it doesn't require enrichment
That’s all. We’ll be back tomorrow with part two. See you then.
–Max and Max