Skip to main content

Hamas, peace?

 Overview of the Trump Peace PlanPresident Donald Trump's 20-point plan for Gaza, unveiled on September 29, 2025, aims to end the nearly two-year Israel-Hamas war through an immediate ceasefire, hostage release, Hamas's disarmament and political exit, and Gaza's reconstruction under international oversight. The plan has been fully endorsed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and welcomed by a broad coalition of global leaders and Arab states (including Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan). It emphasizes a "technocratic" governance model for Gaza without Hamas involvement, leading toward a reformed Palestinian Authority (PA) takeover, but it notably avoids committing to a full two-state solution in the short term, focusing instead on demilitarization and economic revival.The plan's core is framed as a "take it or leave it" ultimatum to Hamas, with Trump warning on October 3, 2025, that rejection would lead to "all hell" breaking loose, giving Israel full U.S. backing to "finish the job." As of today (October 3, 2025), Hamas has issued a statement indicating partial support for key elements—specifically agreeing to release all remaining Israeli hostages (around 20 living and the remains of deceased ones) and hand over Gaza's administration to a Palestinian technocratic body—but rejecting or seeking negotiations on others, such as full disarmament and international oversight figures like former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. Hamas described the plan as needing "further consultations among Palestinians" and emphasized it must align with "Palestinian national consensus and Arab/Islamic support." This falls short of full acceptance, prompting mixed reactions: optimism from Trump ("I look forward to having the hostages come home") and criticism from Israeli supporters who see it as pandering to Hamas.Key Elements of the 20-Point PlanHere's a breakdown of the plan's main components, based on the full text released by the White House:Element

Description

Hamas's Stance (as of Oct 3)

Immediate Ceasefire & Hostage Release

War ends immediately upon acceptance. Hamas releases all 20 living Israeli hostages and remains of the deceased within 72 hours, in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners held by Israel. Scaled-up humanitarian aid (food, medicine, fuel) enters Gaza via expanded corridors.

Accepted: Hamas explicitly agreed to this "according to the exchange formula" in Trump's proposal, provided conditions are met. This is the clearest "yes," tied to the ceasefire.

Hamas's Political & Military Exit

Hamas relinquishes all power in Gaza with no role in future governance. Amnesty for members who pledge peaceful coexistence and decommission weapons; those who wish to leave Gaza can emigrate. All military infrastructure (tunnels, weapons) dismantled under independent monitors.

Partial Support: Hamas "renews its agreement" to hand over administration to a "Palestinian body of independents (technocrats)" based on consensus. However, no mention of accepting disarmament or a permanent ban on their role, which they view as a "right to resist occupation."

Governance & Reconstruction

Temporary "Board of Peace" led by Trump, including international figures (e.g., Tony Blair as co-chair), oversees Gaza until the PA completes reforms and assumes control. Focus on economic rebuilding: desalination plants, housing, jobs, and a "prosperous New Gaza" committed to peaceful coexistence with Israel. Regional partners (e.g., UAE, Saudi Arabia) guarantee compliance.

Mixed: Supports technocratic handover but rejects specific international overseers like Blair, calling for Arab/Islamic involvement instead. Seeks negotiations on funding and reform timelines, aligning with broader Palestinian input.

Demilitarization & Security

Full decommissioning of weapons via a monitored buy-back/reintegration program. Gaza demilitarized zone enforced by independent verifiers. Israel withdraws from "terror-free" areas handed to an International Security Force (ISF). Interfaith dialogue to promote tolerance.

Rejected/Needs Negotiation: No explicit acceptance; Hamas has historically rejected disarmament, insisting on resistance rights until "Israeli occupation ends." This remains a major sticking point.

Long-Term Vision

No immediate Palestinian statehood commitment, but paves way for PA reforms per prior proposals (e.g., Trump's 2020 plan, Saudi-French initiatives). Emphasizes two-state discussions post-stabilization.

Open to Negotiation: Hamas welcomes "sincere efforts" toward peace but ties support to ending occupation and achieving Palestinian rights, echoing PA calls for a statehood path.


Hamas's Statement: What They Back and Why It MattersIn their October 3 statement, Hamas framed their response as a "positive step" toward ending the war, explicitly backing:Hostage/prisoner exchange and ceasefire: To alleviate Gaza's humanitarian crisis (90% displaced, widespread uninhabitability).

Technocratic governance handover: Aligns with their interest in avoiding direct blame for post-war chaos while maintaining influence via "consensus."


However, they conditioned full buy-in on revisions, particularly excluding disarmament and foreign figures seen as pro-Israel (e.g., Blair). A senior Hamas official told the BBC the plan "serves Israel's interests" by ignoring Palestinian self-determination. This partial endorsement is a tactical move: it secures immediate relief (hostage leverage for prisoners/ceasefire) while buying time for talks mediated by Qatar and Egypt, who back the plan but urge tweaks.Broader Reactions and ImplicationsInternational Support: Overwhelmingly positive. EU, France, Germany, Canada, and Russia hailed it as the "best chance" for peace, urging Hamas to comply. Arab states' joint statement signals potential funding/involvement.

Israeli Side: Netanyahu accepts it as a path to "victory over Hamas," but hardliners worry it lets Hamas off too easy without total defeat.

Critics: Palestinians (including PA) praise Trump's "determination" but demand statehood guarantees. On X, users debate if this is a "win" for Trump or a Hamas ploy to fragment the deal.

Next Steps: Trump has pushed for a Sunday (Oct 5) deadline. Mediators in Doha/Cairo are convening Hamas today. If talks stall, escalation risks rise—Israel has continued strikes (e.g., on Gaza's Al-Noor Center for the Blind), and Trump has reiterated U.S. military/diplomatic backing for Israel.


This partial Hamas nod keeps the door open but underscores deep divides: security for Israel vs. sovereignty for Palestinians. Progress hinges on bridging disarmament and governance gaps in coming days.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Revelation For The Preservation Of The Remnant

Chapter 1 The Mark of the Beast Empire The Holy Scriptures were intentionally written in a way so that the impure in heart could read and not understand, but the pure in heart would be able to understand, and through much patience and deep study, with prayer, decipher the hidden secrets within. This is certainly true of Scriptures relating to salvation and is even more true with prophetic Scriptures. This is abundantly true of the subject of the “mark of the beast,'' as mentioned in Revelation 13. In order to understand who are these beast empires, we must learn of the historical kingdoms that were before them and how all the kingdoms related to the people of Yah who are called by His name. I will show just how each of these kingdoms related to the people of Yah and how that applies to the beast kingdoms that would stay in power until the return of Yeshua Hamashiach [Yeshua the Messiah] to establish his kingdom upon the Earth. I've noticed in my communication with other p...

Unknown Genocides

 Genocides we don't discuss  The genocides and ethnic cleansings you’ve listed are significant and often under-discussed in mainstream narratives. Below, I’ll address the ones you mentioned briefly and then highlight additional lesser-known genocides and ethnic cleansings throughout history, based on available information. I’ll aim to be concise while providing context and acknowledging the complexity of these events. Note that some of these cases are debated among scholars regarding whether they meet the legal definition of genocide (intentional destruction of a group in whole or in part) versus ethnic cleansing (forced removal to create ethnic homogeneity). I’ll also avoid speculative claims and stick to what’s supported by historical analysis. ### Your Listed Examples 1. **Armenian Genocide (1915–1923)**      - **Overview**: The Ottoman Empire, under the Young Turks, systematically massacred and deported an estimated 800,000 to 1.5 million Armenians duri...