Mediators involved in brokering the Gaza cease-fire consciously chose to postpone discussions on more intricate matters, like Hamas’s weaponry. This decision, as explained by Qatar’s prime minister in a recent interview, stemmed from the fact that neither warring faction was prepared for a comprehensive peace accord at that time.
Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, a pivotal figure in the diplomatic push to end the Gaza war, has long-standing ties with Hamas’s leadership. He shared these insights with The New York Times shortly after Israel and Hamas reached an agreement to pause fighting in Gaza and facilitate a significant exchange: all remaining hostages for roughly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners.
Crucially, this agreement intentionally deferred the most contentious aspects of the conflict, such as the fate of Hamas’s arms and the post-war governance of Gaza, to be addressed at a subsequent stage.
Speaking in Paris after engaging with French President Emmanuel Macron and other Arab and European foreign ministers on Gaza’s future, Sheikh Mohammed emphasized, “Had we pursued a full-package negotiation, we would never have achieved these initial outcomes.”
According to Sheikh Mohammed, Hamas has indicated an openness to discuss forging a new type of relationship with Israel.
“Hamas is indeed prepared to engage in dialogue about how they can cease to pose a threat to Israel,” the prime minister affirmed.
Requests for comment from Hamas officials, the Israeli prime minister’s office, and the Israeli foreign ministry did not receive an immediate response.
Historically, Hamas has expressed readiness for a prolonged truce with Israel. As recently as March, Khalil al-Hayya, the group’s chief negotiator, informed American officials in Qatar that the group was amenable to a five- to ten-year cessation of hostilities, which would involve disarming.
However, Hamas has more recently taken a public stance against disarmament. Instead, they have proposed a comprehensive Palestinian national dialogue to address Gaza’s future, including the critical issue of their arsenal.
The conflict with Israel has significantly weakened Hamas, leading to internal divisions within the group regarding its future direction and strategy.
Within Hamas, some factions advocate for retaining their weapons, even if it risks reigniting the conflict and causing further Palestinian casualties. Conversely, others argue for a more pragmatic approach to arms and other critical issues.
Image: Hamas fighters in Deir al-Balah, central Gaza, in February. (Credit: Saher Alghorra for The New York Times)
By releasing the remaining hostages in Gaza, Hamas relinquished considerable bargaining power with Israel, yet without any firm guarantees that all its objectives would be met.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently asserted that Hamas must be disarmed as a prerequisite for a permanent end to the Gaza war.
Hamas, however, has historically considered this demand a call for surrender, framing armed struggle as a legitimate form of resistance against Israeli presence in Palestinian territories.
Earlier this month, Mr. Netanyahu declared that Hamas would be disarmed and Gaza demilitarized, whether through diplomatic means or military action.
He stated unequivocally, “Either it will be achieved the easy way, or it will be achieved the hard way. But it will be achieved.”
Some Arab mediators believe they can convince Hamas to partially disarm, provided that President Trump offers assurances that Israel will not resume hostilities.
Sheikh Mohammed highlighted a crucial question: to whom would Hamas surrender its weapons? He emphasized a significant distinction between the group handing over its arsenal to a Palestinian authority versus another external entity.
The timeline for initiating negotiations on the remaining contentious issues between Israel and Hamas remains uncertain.
President Trump’s proposed framework for ending the Gaza war includes creating a temporary international stabilization force. Sheikh Mohammed suggested that the next phase of discussions should center on establishing this force, which he sees as intrinsically linked to Hamas’s disarmament and further Israeli troop withdrawals from Gaza.
Under the U.S. plan, as this international force assumes control, the Israeli military would retreat according to predefined “standards, milestones, and time frames linked to demilitarization.” The plan further mandates that this stabilization force would be responsible for training Palestinian police and assisting in securing border areas.
Image: Qatar’s prime minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, speaks at a United Nations Security Council emergency meeting in September, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders in Doha. (Credit: Eduardo Munoz/Reuters)