Hamas Rejects Disarmament Proposal in Gaza Talks, Demands End to Israeli Occupation First
A new Israeli proposal delivered via Egypt demands Hamas hand over remaining Israeli captives and disarm, reigniting fierce debate over the future of armed resistance in Gaza.
Watan-Israel’s latest proposal regarding ceasefire negotiations in Gaza has triggered widespread controversy in Palestinian circles, as it officially and explicitly includes the disarmament of the resistance as a condition for ending the war. A few days ago, the Egyptian mediator conveyed the revised proposal to a Hamas delegation led by Khalil al-Hayya.
The proposal clearly stipulated the disarmament of Gaza’s resistance and the handover of the remaining 59 captives—classified as soldiers, whether dead or alive—in exchange for discussing an end to the war and post-war arrangements in Gaza.
The proposal reignited debate within Hamas and among other Palestinian factions such as Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, about how to deal with the issue of armed resistance.
Hamas has long insisted on maintaining its arms and has rejected several past proposals that touched on disarmament, notably one in 2017 when the Trump administration offered financial incentives in Gaza in exchange for storing weapons. The issue has resurfaced multiple times, including by leaders like Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar—both targeted by Israel during the current war.
Mardaoui: Resistance Weapons Represent the People’s Will
Hamas leader Mahmoud Mardaoui stated that “disarming the resistance is not even up for discussion or negotiation. This Israeli-American agenda seeks to dismantle any real ability to defend the Palestinian people.” He added, “Resistance weapons are not merely tools of combat. They symbolize the people’s will and their rejection of occupation.”
He stressed that these arms serve as a safeguard for Palestinian resilience and a defense against extermination. “We reject disarmament because we are still facing a brutal occupation that continues to kill, displace, and besiege our people. No liberation movement in history has given up its weapons before the end of occupation.”
According to Mardaoui, political and public rejection will be the response to such pressure, as resistance and its arms are part of a firm national consensus across all Palestinian factions and society. He warned that Hamas will consider any effort to impose disarmament a red line that strikes at the heart of the Palestinian cause.
Israel resumed its military campaign on March 18 after a 60-day pause brokered in Doha. Though the deal outlined a three-phase process, Israel withdrew from the agreement after the first phase.
Historical Failures of Disarmament
Political analyst Ibrahim Al-Madhoun argued that the subject of arms in Palestinian society is deeply sensitive and even sacred. “There have been previous disarmament experiences, despite the limited nature of the weapons involved—simple rifles—and the results were catastrophic.”
Al-Madhoun pointed to the 1948 Nakba, which followed the disarmament of Palestinians, and the massacres after the disarmament of the PLO in Beirut in 1982, such as the Sabra and Shatila massacre.
He emphasized that Israel is not just threatening to expel Palestinians—it is actively doing so through mass killings and destruction. Despite this, it has failed to achieve military victory. He noted that Hamas does not possess traditional military weapons—no tanks, planes, or nuclear bombs—but it stands against one of the most advanced militaries in the world with global support.
Why Hamas Refuses to Disarm
Ahmad Al-Tannani, director of the Arab Center for Research and Strategic Studies, explained that disarming the resistance amounts to a direct assault on Hamas’s core identity. “This proposal strikes at the very foundation of the social contract between Hamas and its support base, which embraces armed resistance as the primary path toward liberation.”
He added that this is not simply about weapons, but about legitimizing Israeli security control and surrendering hard-won achievements by the Palestinian people—especially in Gaza, where resistance forced the Israeli withdrawal.
Tannani argued that the vague frameworks pushed by Netanyahu and the U.S. aim to dismantle Palestinian resilience piece by piece. He noted that no credible political horizon for Palestinians is being offered in return—not even a sovereign state on the 1967 borders. Meanwhile, Israeli assaults persist across Gaza, the West Bank, Jerusalem, and within 1948-occupied areas.
According to Tannani, the resistance faces limited options amid overwhelming international bias and regional weakness. However, he concluded that steadfastness against Israeli conditions and U.S. pressure is key to defeating this latest campaign, which aims to extract political concessions that Israeli military force and genocide failed to achieve.
