Hamas, like its long-time benefactor Iran, has once again made its position unmistakably clear: It has no intention of surrendering its weapons, abandoning its armed “resistance” against Israel, or relinquishing control over the Gaza Strip.
If anyone in Washington or elsewhere still believes that Hamas has agreed to disarm under the Gaza peace plan presented by US President Donald J. Trump and his Board of Peace, they should listen carefully to what Hamas officials themselves are saying.
Two recent interviews with senior Hamas officials leave little room for doubt.
Hamas official Osama Hamdan said, “No one said that we will hand over our weapons.” According to Hamdan, the word “hand over” was never part of the agreement his terrorist group reached with the mediators. Instead, Hamdan said, the agreed framework calls for the “containment and storage” of Hamas’s heavy weapons. He added that this would be carried out by the Palestinian Committee for the Administration of Gaza and the Palestinian “resistance factions.”
Most revealingly, Hamdan declared: “Not a single bullet will leave the Gaza Strip according to this agreement [with the Board of Peace representatives].” He also insisted that no weapons would be handed over to a non-Palestinian party and that “the weapons will remain in the hands of the Palestinians.”
Hamas is not talking about disarmament. It is talking about keeping its weapons. This discussion is not actually about semantics. It goes to the heart of whether Hamas is prepared to abandon terrorism and, in particular, its decades-old goal of destroying Israel.
Hamas’s position was reinforced by Khaled Qaddoumi, the terrorist organization’s representative in Iran. In an interview published by Iran’s Islamic Republic News Agency, Qaddoumi made clear that Hamas regards weapons as essential to its struggle against Israel. He rejected the idea that the question of weapons should even be discussed before Israel’s military presence in the Gaza Strip ends. “The question of weapons, whether heavy or light, has nothing to do with Israel,” Qaddoumi said. “Only the Palestinians will decide on it.”
Qaddoumi’s claim that the weapons “have nothing to do with Israel” is particularly revealing. Hamas’s weapons are not being stockpiled to fight Canada, Australia, or some other distant country. They are weapons that Hamas has used, and openly intends to use, against Israel. As senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad vowed soon after the group’s October 7, 2023 invasion of Israel:
“The Al-Aqsa Flood [Palestinian name for the October 7 attack] is just the first time And there will be a second, third and fourth. We must teach Israel a lesson and we will do this again and again…”
When Hamad’s interviewer asked him, “Does that mean the annihilation of Israel?,” Hamad responded, “Yes, of course.”
Rockets, anti-tank missiles, explosives, and firearms are not abstract “Palestinian internal matters.” They are the very weapons with which Hamas has attacked Israeli civilians and soldiers.
Qaddoumi’s formulation is also a reminder of the fundamental problem with the current approach to Hamas. The terrorist group wants the international community to recognize its political claims while treating its military arsenal as an internal Palestinian issue.
Hamas cannot have it both ways. It cannot demand an end to Israel’s military presence in Gaza while simultaneously insisting on retaining the weapons that it has used — and clearly plans to use again — to attack Israel. The victims of Hamas’s weapons have a say in the matter too.
The question is not who gets to decide what happens to Hamas’s weapons. The question is why Hamas should be allowed to keep them at all.
Qaddoumi argued that a Palestinian political framework and a new Palestinian government must first be established. Only afterward, he said, could Palestinians decide whether their weapons should be collected.
This is exactly the opposite of disarmament. Hamas is essentially saying: First give us political power and remove Israelis forces from the Gaza Strip. Afterward, we may discuss what happens to our weapons.
Why should the surrender of weapons be conditional on anything?
var images = [],
index = 0;
images[0] = ““;
images[1] = ““;
images[2] = ““;
images[3] = ““;
index = Math.floor(Math.random() * images.length);
document.write(images[index]);
//done
Hamas’s laying down its weapons and relinquishing its political and military control over the Gaza Strip must be unconditional. Hamas is a terrorist organization that launched the October 7, 2023 invasion and massacre. It is not a sovereign state entitled to negotiate the terms of its own disarmament.
Trump’s 20-Point Gaza Peace Plan calls for the “demilitarization” of the Gaza Strip and the “decommissioning” of weapons. Point 13 states:
“Hamas and other factions agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form. All military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt. There will be a process of demilitarization of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors, which will include placing weapons permanently beyond use through an agreed process of decommissioning, and supported by an internationally funded buy back and reintegration program all verified by the independent monitors.”
