US President Donald Trump has announced a deal requiring Hamas to disarm in exchange for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. While the US administration describes the move as a historic step toward peace, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has condemned the agreement as unacceptable.
Ben-Gvir’s Warning of a Future Massacre
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir has emerged as a primary critic of the US-brokered agreement, arguing that the terms are fundamentally flawed. According to the report, Ben-Gvir likened the deal to "agreeing to Hamas preparing for the next massacre," suggesting that the disarmament process is insufficient to guarantee Israeli security.
This hard-right opposition reflects a deep ideological divide within the Israeli government. While President Donald Trump has hailed the agreement as a "monumental step toward lasting peace and security," the internal friction suggests that the Israeli cabinet is far from a unified front on how to handle the militant group's weaponry .
The NCAG and the Board of Peace's Governance Plan
The proposed framework introduces two new entities to manage the transition: the National Committee for Administration of Gaza (NCAG) and the Board of Peace. As reported by the source, the NCAG is tasked with governing the territory and overseeing the actual disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups.
To ensure a physical separation between combatants, the deal calls for the establishment of an International Stabilization Force. This force would act as a buffer between the Israeli military and the areas controlled by the NCAG, while the Board of Peace prrovides high-level supervision to ensure the roadmap is followed.
The Disarmament vs. Withdrawal Deadlock
A critical point of contention remains the sequence of events, creating a strategic stalemate between the two parties. A political source close to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that no Israeli withdrawal would occur unless Hamas fully disarmed first. Conversely,Hamas has maintained that it will not surrender its weapons until Israeli forces have completely left Gaza.
Nickolay Mladenov, the Board of Peace's representative for Gaza, has attempted to bridge this gap by stating on X that "withdrawal must move in lockstep with decommissioning." This "lockstep" approach is intended to prevent either side from feeling vulnerable, though the lack of a concrete timeline makes the arrangement fragile.
Thursday’s Airstrikes and the Fragility of the Truce
Despite the optimistic rhetoric from Camp David, the reality on the ground remains violent. Health officials reported that Israeli airstrikes on Thursday killed at least four people, including two children, highlighting the disconnect between the diplomatic announcements and the active conflict in Gaza.
The persistence of military operations suggests that the "immediate halt" called for in the agreement has not been fully realized. While UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas have welcomed the deal, Kallas specifically cautioned that significant obstacles still remain before a stable peace can be achieved.
The Cairo Talks and the Role of Qatar and Turkey
The next phase of the diplomatic effort will shift to Egypt, where mediators from the US, Qatar, and Turkey are scheduled to hold talks in Cairo. These discussions are expected to focus on the practical implementation of the disarmament roadmap and the transition of authority to the NCAG.
Several critical questions remain unanswered, most notably how the International Stabilization Force will be composed and who will provide the funding for the NCAG's administration. furthermore, since the source only reports the positions of the US and specific Israeli/Hamas officials, it remains unclear if the broader Israeli security establishment or the rank-and-file of Hamas leadership have formally signed off on the "lockstep" decommissioning process.
Comments 0