Hamas Signals Willingness to Discuss Parts of Trump’s Gaza Peace Plan
In a development reported by multiple outlets, Hamas indicated it is ready to engage with parts of a peace proposal presented by U.S. President Donald Trump for the Gaza Strip. The Islamist group said it would consider the plan’s elements that address the fate of hostages and the future administration of Gaza, while outlining conditions tied to Palestinian unity and international law. Reuters cites Hamas as saying it would transfer all dead and alive Israeli hostages under certain circumstances, and it reaffirmed a long-standing position that it would not disarm until the Israeli occupation of Gaza ends.
Hamas framed its response as a basis for further negotiations rather than a final settlement. The group asserted that provisions affecting Gaza’s governance and Palestinian rights should be determined through a collectively agreed Palestinian stance, achieved through consultation with other factions and grounded in international law. In particular, Hamas called for a unified position among Palestinian factions before any binding decisions are made and indicated a willingness to negotiate details with mediators.
On the issue of disarmament, Hamas did not back away from its core demand linked to an end to the Israeli blockade and occupation. The group signaled that weapons handover would be contingent on broader political changes in the region, underscoring that the timeline for such steps remains a central point of contention. The pledge to negotiate suggests a potential opening for a broader dialogue, albeit one that would require consensus among Palestinian factions, not just Hamas.
Trump publicly framed the moment as a crucial test for Hamas, describing it as a “last chance” to approve his peace plan. He asserted that the path forward would enable a pause in fighting, with the objective of rescuing hostages and driving toward a sustainable ceasefire. The plan outlined by the White House envisions a rapid hostage release: within 72 hours, all 48 Hamas-held hostages would be moved out of Gaza, followed by the freestanding release of Palestinian prisoners and detainees. The Reuters report notes that within Hamas there are caveats, including skepticism about the feasibility of a 72-hour timetable.
What the Plan Seeks to Deliver
The peace framework presented by Trump envisions a sequence aimed at ending fighting and establishing a security and governance framework for Gaza. If implemented, the plan would involve significant prisoner movements on both sides and a transition in Gaza’s administration toward a technocratic Palestinian body. It is unclear how such a body would be formed or how it would interact with existing authorities in Gaza and the West Bank, but Hamas has stressed that any governance solution must be built on a united Palestinian position and international law.
The international response has generally welcomed the possibility of hostage releases and a path toward talks, though many observers caution that substantial differences remain. The plan’s core mechanics—end of hostilities, phased prisoner releases, and a governance shift—have previously drawn both support and hesitancy from regional actors and global powers.
Global and regional reactions flowed in quickly after Hamas’s remarks. European leaders, regional mediators in Qatar and Egypt, and United Nations officials urged all sides to seize the moment and translate rhetoric into tangible steps toward ending the violence. In Israel, family groups of hostages urged Prime Minister Netanyahu to participate actively in talks, stressing the urgency of securing the safe return of abducted relatives. Domestic political dynamics in Israel, including opposition to concessions among right-wing coalition partners, add another layer of complexity to any potential agreement.
As discussions unfold, observers will watch for signs of real compromise, especially on the pace of hostages’ release, the structure of Gaza’s administration, and how Palestinian unity might be achieved. The coming days are likely to determine whether the current openness translates into concrete steps toward a durable resolution or whether entrenched positions will again stall progress.
