Days after the United Nations Security Council demanded a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas militants in Gaza, the violence has continued.
On Monday, 14 council members voted in favour of adopting a resolution that as well as the unconditional release of all hostages.
The United States did not use its veto to block the motion, sparking a spat with its ally Israel.
The resolution followed almost six months of failed attempts and signifies an important step towards de-escalating fighting in the region after the 7 October attack on Israel by Hamas.
Nevertheless, Israeli missiles are reportedly continuing to strike Gaza while the Israel Defence Forces have said Hamas has fired towards the Israeli city of Ashdod, north of Gaza. This raises the question: how effective is a UN ceasefire demand?
Is a UN resolution legally binding?
Under the founding UN Charter, "members of the United Nations agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council".
As a member, Israel is legally bound to the outcome of the resolution, but in practice, ceasefires can look a bit different.
"It all depends on the parties to the conflict and their willingness to uphold the law," said Juliette McIntyre, a law lecturer at the University of South Australia.
"There are laws that regulate the conduct of war, and sometimes parties do try to uphold those, and other times they just throw them out the window."
However, it has welcomed the Security Council resolution, saying in a statement that it "affirms readiness to engage in immediate prisoner swaps on both sides".
Hamas is designated as a terrorist organisation by countries including Australia, Canada, the UK and the US while New Zealand and Paraguay list only its military wing as a terrorist group.
How are ceasefires enforced?
McIntyre said "the UN Security Council is the only body in the international legal structure that has the power to order lawful military action".
It can also impose sanctions to maintain or restore international peace and security.
However, further action would require a resolution that would need to be passed by the Security Council, without a veto from member states including the US.
"So short of military action of that sort, there's no talking about forcing Israel to comply," she said.
Ultimately, if there is no ceasefire in Gaza, it's unlikely the Security Council will take any further action.
Marika Sosnowski, a research fellow at Melbourne Law School, said the ceasefire resolution is a significant step and that a "red line has been drawn".
She said the US abstaining from the vote, after disagreeing with previous wording of ceasefire resolutions, indicated something has fundamentally shifted.
What will happen next?
There are several ways the international community can apply pressure on Israel to comply with the UN resolution.
This includes economic sanctions or the cancelling of trade agreements, embargoes on certain items as well as diplomatic pressure, according to Sosnowski.
"All those could happen," she said.
Sosnowski said there may be more activity in negotiations facilitated by Qatar and Egypt, as well as pressure on Israel by the US to agree to some terms both around hostage releases and humanitarian aid.
McIntyre said the resolution was not intended to fix the problem, but simply "a piece of a puzzle that includes direct negotiations between Hamas and Israel".
She agreed these pieces include political pressure including not supplying weapons to Israel, with suspensions in place by Canada, the Netherlands, Japan, Spain and Belgium.
"These don't automatically fix the issue alone, but they contribute quite a lot to hopefully a place where ceasefire will become permanent and long-lasting," she said.
In response to the ceasefire calls, the Israeli Prime Minister's Office said: "Hamas rebuffed all US offers for a compromise, while celebrating the Security Council's resolution.
"Israel will not address Hamas's delusional demands. Israel will pursue and achieve its just war objectives: Destroying Hamas's military and governmental capacities, release of all the hostages, and ensuring Gaza will not pose a threat to the people of Israel in the future."
- with additional reporting from Reuters
