Gaza Peace Framework: Cautious Outlook Amidst Challenges
A recent peace initiative for Gaza, developed by President Donald Trump, has the potential to shift power dynamics in the region. However, experts caution that without completely disarming Hamas, any progress might merely delay further conflict.
Dr. Michael Milshtein, who leads the Moshe Dayan Forum at Tel Aviv University and specializes in Hamas, argues that focusing on disbanding the group shows a fundamental misunderstanding of its operational style. He stated, “Forget terms like peace and coexistence. That’s simply unrealistic. Hamas has made it clear that they will not adhere to international mandates or similar arrangements.” According to him, while the organization may allow the Palestinian administration to manage day-to-day affairs, it will continue to exert influence in the background, much like Hezbollah does in Lebanon.
Milshtein also noted that Hamas’ position on “freezing” its military capabilities, rather than surrendering them, underscores its long-term strategy. “They may reduce certain capacities but will retain light weapons and some explosives. In all scenarios, Hamas will persist as both a military and social entity in Gaza,” he added.
Reports from Arab sources suggest that while Hamas might agree to disarm, this would depend on guarantees that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu wouldn’t reignite conflict against those who lay down their arms. They anticipate further negotiations will be challenging.
Ghaith Al Omari from the Washington Institute expressed optimism about current regional cooperation, attributing it to Trump’s ability to identify opportunities effectively. “He recognized the moment and took action,” he observed.
Al Omari pointed out multiple converging pressures, with increasing attacks on Qatari soil spurring Arab states into action. “They possess considerable influence, and this time they leveraged it effectively,” he remarked. A critical player is Turkey, whose involvement is crucial due to its linkages with Hamas’ leadership and financial support. Al Omari explained that Turkey can offer a model for Hamas, suggesting that disarming could allow it to transition into a legitimate political entity.
While this may encourage Hamas to adopt a long-term strategy—potentially waiting for the Palestinian Authority to weaken—it doesn’t eliminate the group’s presence. Al Omari has voiced concern about early signs of weakening Arab unity around disarmament efforts. Comments from Egypt’s foreign minister and Emirati officials have raised alarms that indicate a potential unraveling of solidarity.
The coming weeks could be crucial, with Al Omari stating, “If Hamas fails to disarm, the situation could escalate quickly.” Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, emphasized that the ceasefire should not be mistaken for lasting peace. Real peace will only occur when Hamas relinquishes its arms entirely and its governance role in Gaza is eliminated. He dismissed the idea that Hamas would comply voluntarily, stating, “They are unlikely to give up. A stronger military approach may be necessary.”
Former Israeli intelligence chief Tamir Heyman laid out several possible outcomes once hostages are released and hostilities subside. In the most optimistic scenario, Hamas might assist in forming a new technocratic government with international oversight. However, he noted that if Israel resists disarming Hamas, it might still create limited security arrangements with international forces gradually.
In the most likely scenario, Heyman suggested that without external intervention, the IDF would maintain a presence along the border, creating a buffer zone. He described this as “controlled security” rather than actual peace, with Hamas still retaining certain arms.
Overall, analysts adopt a watchful stance, recognizing that while Trump’s campaign has united regional interests, sustaining that cooperation amid disarmament will be the true test. If Hamas continues its dual role as a militia and a governing body, it’s possible the world may soon find that any so-called peace is simply a pause before the next round of conflict.
