HAMAS is playing with weapons again — yesterday they ‘agreed’, today they no longer do

Around Gaza, the same cycle spins again: mediators talk about progress, sources promise formulas, Hamas pretends to be ready for concessions, and the next day everything almost returns to the starting point.

Yesterday, ‘Ash-Sharq al-Awsat’ reported that Hamas allegedly agreed to hand over weapons to the ‘Palestinian side’. Today, sources from ‘Al-Hadas’ already claim the opposite: there is no agreement on such a formula.

For Israel, this is not a technical detail of negotiations. It’s a matter of security, control over Gaza, the future of the country’s south, and whether October 7 will repeat in another form in a few years.

Mediators are trying to save the Gaza agreement

According to ‘Al-Hadas’, Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey continue efforts to prevent the peace agreement on Gaza from completely collapsing and to advance it to the second stage.

The main contentious point is the disarmament of Hamas. It remains the central barrier between beautiful diplomatic statements and real security on the ground.

Channel sources reported on Wednesday that Hamas did not accept the formula proposed by the mediators. It was separately emphasized: the movement has not yet agreed to hand over weapons to the Palestinian side.

Yesterday there was one version, today another

The day before, a well-informed Palestinian official claimed that mediators and Hamas allegedly agreed on a conditional formula regarding the limitation of weapons among Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip.

But a new signal from Arab sources shows: there is no final decision. Hamas continues to bargain, changes its tone, and links weapons to conditions that look extremely problematic for Israel.

It’s not just about warehouses, rifles, or rockets. For the Israeli audience, it’s a question of who will control Gaza after the war: a civilian structure, an international mechanism, or again an armed group that has been building tunnels, producing rockets, and holding hostages for decades.

Hamas ties weapons to the withdrawal of the IDF and the restoration of Gaza

According to a Palestinian source, Hamas links the issue of armament with the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip, the cessation of all war consequences, and the restoration of the enclave.

This is where the main conflict of interests begins. Israel insists that the surrender of weapons should precede the transition to the second stage of the peace plan proposed by US President Donald Trump. The logic is simple: first security, then political and economic mechanisms.

Hamas, judging by leaks, wants the reverse order. First withdrawal, restoration, and de facto relief of pressure, and the issue of weapons later, conditionally, partially, and within some ‘Palestinian side’.

For Israel, such a scheme looks like a risky trap. If Hamas’s armed infrastructure remains at least partially, the Gaza Strip could again become a base for pressure on Sderot, Ashkelon, Be’eri, Nir Oz, Kfar Aza, and the entire south of the country.

Why the ‘Palestinian side’ formula raises questions

The expression ‘hand over weapons to the Palestinian side’ sounds diplomatic but too vague.

To whom exactly? The Palestinian Authority? A new committee? A power structure under Arab control? People who might be linked to the same groups tomorrow? Without a clear verification mechanism, such a formula could turn into not disarmament, but repackaging of weapons under another name.

That’s why it’s important for the Israeli reader to look not only at the headlines but also at the details. Nikk.Agency in this context draws attention to the main thing: negotiations around Gaza cannot be assessed by the words ‘progress’ or ‘agreement’ until it is clear who really controls the weapons, tunnels, warehouses, rockets, and combat units.

Cairo meetings and the main question for Israel

A delegation of Hamas leadership, headed by Khalil al-Hayya, one of the movement’s leaders in Gaza, has held a series of intensive meetings in Cairo in recent days.

Among the participants in the negotiation process are mentioned the Prime Minister of Qatar, representatives of Egyptian intelligence, and Turkish officials. This shows that around the agreement there is not just a Palestinian-Israeli bargaining, but a broader regional process involving countries, each pursuing its own interests.

Qatar seeks to maintain its role as a key mediator. Egypt tries to retain control over the southern direction and prevent chaos at its border. Turkey strengthens its political presence in the Palestinian issue. And Israel, unlike the mediators, lives not with formulations on paper, but with the consequences of any mistake at the border.

What will happen next

So far, the situation looks like this: mediators are looking for a compromise, Hamas does not agree to directly surrender weapons, and Israel is unlikely to accept a scheme where the movement first gets troop withdrawal and restoration, and the issue of disarmament remains suspended.

The main problem is not that the negotiations are difficult. The main problem is that Hamas is trying to turn disarmament from a mandatory security condition into a subject of endless political bargaining.

For Israel, this is a fundamental crossroads. If the second stage of the agreement is built on vague promises, the country risks getting not the end of the war, but a pause before a new threat. If the weapons are indeed seized, verified, and removed from the control of terrorist structures, then Gaza may have a chance for a different reality.

So far, there is no such confirmation.