Hamas Demands Major Changes to Trump’s Gaza Ceasefire Plan

Hamas Demands Major Changes to Trump’s Gaza Ceasefire Plan

Hamas says the Gaza ceasefire proposal put forward by U.S. President Donald Trump needs “substantial amendments,” according to a source close to the movement. After two days of internal discussions and talks with allied Palestinian factions, Hamas has outlined key areas where the plan falls short.

The source told Xinhua that Hamas wants clear guarantees on four fronts: a full end to hostilities, a detailed timetable for Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, preservation of resistance weapons, and firm international guarantees to prevent renewed attacks.

“The draft contains some superficial positives,” the source said, “but it also carries serious risks that undermine the core of the Palestinian cause.” Hamas insists that any prisoner release be directly linked to the withdrawal process “to prevent Israel from halting implementation after receiving its captives.”

On reconstruction, the movement argues that rebuilding Gaza should be managed by a Palestinian body rather than an international council. The current draft, they say, is “fundamentally different” from the version shared with Arab and Islamic leaders last month, following major changes by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“Hamas cannot reject the plan entirely,” the source added, but will press for “clarifications and guarantees on ending the war and full withdrawal, along with revisions to points related to governance and weapons.”

Ramallah-based analyst Hani al-Masri of the Masarat Center for Policy Studies also warned of “serious risks” in the plan’s current form. He argued it grants Israel “immediate and certain gains, while giving Palestinians only vague and delayed promises,” and could serve as a “cover for prolonged occupation and turning Gaza into an international protectorate.”

Al-Masri called for “conditional acceptance and guarantees,” cautioning that without them, the proposal would become “a recipe for new colonialism that eliminates the two-state solution.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back To Top