Context: Hamas responds to Trump’s latest ceasefire framework
The Hamas movement issued a response to a prominent set of proposals presented by former U.S. President Donald Trump, signaling a willingness to engage on the release of hostages and a path toward ending the Gaza war. In its reply, Hamas did not address the central demand long urged by Israel and its allies: the militant group’s disarmament or the relocation of its fighters abroad. Across diplomatic capitals, the comments were greeted with cautious optimism, but also with questions about the specifics still to be worked out through mediators.
What the Hamas statement actually offers
Hamas said it is prepared to release all living hostages and to return the bodies of those who have died, in exchange for Palestinian prisoners held by Israel. The movement also expressed willingness to begin immediate negotiations on the operational details of these releases. In addition, Hamas indicated openness to talks about the broader arrangements governing Gaza’s future, provided discussions occur within a Palestinian framework in which the group would participate and contribute responsibility.
What was not addressed
Crucially, the answer sidestepped the two points frequently emphasized by Israel and Western mediators: full disarmament of Hamas and the exile of some fighters to third countries. Those issues remain central to the American plan and to Israel’s condition for a lasting settlement, leaving analysts to wonder how the rescuing of hostages and a ceasefire will be synchronized with a broader settlement framework.
Global reactions: cautious optimism
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said he was encouraged by Hamas’ reply, and key Gulf mediators signaled a positive reception. Qatar, a pivotal mediator, welcomed Hamas’ agreement in principle to Trump’s framework, while Egypt, also involved in negotiations, called the response positive. On the other side of the Atlantic, Trump publicly framed the moment as a potential turning point, arguing in a video post that steps toward a ceasefire should proceed swiftly and that the entire process must be carried out fairly for all involved.
France and other capitals: leadership views
French President Emmanuel Macron said the hostage release and a ceasefire were within reach, underscoring the urgency of moving from words to concrete actions. In Washington, Trump gave Hamas a deadline—Sunday at 6 p.m. Eastern Time—to accept the proposals, a deadline Netanyahu later indicated he could back, though the Israeli prime minister also stressed the need for a clear and enforceable plan before any durable agreement.
On the ground: the humanitarian and battlefield context
The conflict has inflicted a heavy toll on civilians. The Hamas-run health and civil defense networks report mounting casualties amid ongoing Israeli operations in Gaza City and surrounding areas. The attack by Hamas on October 7, 2023, which triggered the current war, involved the abduction of hundreds of people. Israeli authorities say 251 individuals were seized that day, with 47 still held hostage in Gaza and 25 confirmed dead among those abducted. As fighting continues, the humanitarian calculus—airstrikes, civilian displacement, and limited access to aid—remains central to coordination among mediators and humanitarian agencies.
What prospects for a ceasefire could look like
The Trump plan envisions a 72-hour window for hostage releases, followed by a staged withdrawal of Israeli forces and the establishment of a transitional authority over Gaza led by the United States, with an international security presence. The timeline and sequencing are under debate, with Hamas insisting on a framework that respects Palestinian sovereignty and a credible path to political reconciliation. Israel has consistently refused to grant a formal role to Hamas in the post‑war order, complicating the prospect of a quick and comprehensive settlement.
Looking ahead: a uncertain but hopeful moment
As negotiators in Doha, Cairo, and other capitals weigh the proposals, the coming days will test whether a fragile truce can be transformed into a durable ceasefire. The parties’ willingness to discuss implementation details—without immediate concessions on disarmament—will shape the stability of any pause in the fighting. In the near term, the focus remains on freeing hostages, protecting civilians, and creating the conditions under which a broader political framework might eventually take hold.
