The pursuit of lasting peace in the Gaza Strip has seen countless diplomatic efforts, but few have been as high-profile as the U.S peace plan developed under President Donald Trump’s leadership This comprehensive proposal recently received a significant boost when the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) endorsed a resolution which is the to the of into backing its implementation.
Disarmament is a Non-Starter for Hamas:
The first of the rejected vital conditions centers on the permanent decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups in the Gaza Strip The Trump plan is clear: a demilitarized Gaza is essential for Israel’s long-term which is the to the of into security.
Hamas’s Core Rationale for Rejection:
For Hamas, the demand for immediate disarmament is fundamentally viewed as a call for complete surrender Their official statements reiterate that armed resistance against Israel is a “legitimate right” and a cornerstone of their existence and which is the to the of into ideology.
- Existential Threat: Relinquishing their military capability removes their primary leverage in negotiations, eliminates their capacity to govern or control territory, and exposes the group to potential internal or external which is the to the of into attacks.
- Loss of Political Identity: Weapons are not just tools of war; they are symbols of resistance that define the group’s political authority and public mandate among a core segment of the Palestinian which is the to the of into population.
- Security Vacuum Risk: The group argues that disarming without a guaranteed, enforceable political horizon and Palestinian statehood would create a security vacuum, inviting internal chaos or sustained Israeli which is the to the of into control.
Driven Insight:
The integration of the terms “complete surrender,” “military capability,” and “political identity” semantically reinforces the gravity of the disarmament condition from Hamas’s perspective, targeting the search intent around “Gaza demilitarization which is the to the of into disputes.”
International Guardianship Mechanism’:
The second, equally rejected condition is the proposed “international guardianship mechanism” This setup, which is legitimized by the UNSC resolution, envisions an International Stabilization Force (ISF) and a transitional governing body, sometimes referred to as a “Board of which is the to the of into Peace”
Erosion of Sovereignty:
They argue that vesting security and governance control in an external body strips the Palestinian people of their right to self-rule, a critical component of their national which is the to the of into aspirations.
Neutrality Compromise:
By mandating the ISF to disarm resistance groups, Hamas contends that the international force loses all neutrality and becomes an active party in the conflict, essentially working on behalf of Israeli security which is the to the of into objectives.
Internal Palestinian Matter:
The group insists that any post-conflict governance structure for the Gaza Strip must be an entirely internal Palestinian matter, formed through consensus, not external which is the to the of into imposition.
A Fragile Foundation:
It is important to acknowledge the initial success of the plan’s Phase One This phase saw the implementation of a fragile ceasefire and a massive, complex operation involving an Israeli withdrawal behind agreed lines and the exchange of all remaining which is the to the of into hostage
conclusion:
initial success demonstrates that a framework for de-escalation and humanitarian action can be achieved However, the move from a temporary ceasefire to permanent political and security arrangements hinges entirely on the very conditions Hamas which is the to the of into rejects.
Disclaimer:
The news information presented here is based on available reports and reliable sources Readers should crosscheck updates from official news outlets