The Contradictions Trump Prefers Not to See in the Gaza Plan

Reports of a Gaza deal are proving premature: three parties present different interpretations. Hamas offers to keep light weapons and a civilian presence, the Peace Council demands full disarmament, and Israel distances itself from the framework. Even in the optimistic scenario, an agreement with a jihadist organization is no guarantee of quiet.

Reports over the past day about reaching an agreement regarding the Gaza Strip, including from President Donald Trump, create an impression of progress, but a closer look at the sources reveals deep contradictions. Hamas talks about keeping light weapons in its hands and storing them in the Strip, the Peace Council presents full disarmament, and Israel rejects the proposal. The talks in Cairo are conducted between Hamas and Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey, with the involvement of Mohammed Dahlan. The central dispute concerns the meaning of 'disarmament' and who will receive the weapons. Hamas demands to keep light weapons, including shoulder-fired missiles, and to absorb its 40,000 employees into the new mechanisms. The Peace Council demands the dismantling of all weapons, the destruction of tunnels and production facilities, and oversight by a verification committee. Israel demands the removal of weapons from Gaza and complete demilitarization. Trump's optimism appears premature, and Hamas is essentially offering its traditional position in new clothing. Even in the optimistic scenario, Israel cannot rest on its laurels.