Hamas has signaled a willingness to engage with parts of a peace initiative put forward by President Trump to halt the ongoing war in Gaza. This development offers a flicker of hope, though the road to resolution remains steep and uncertain.
According to The Hill, Hamas expressed on Friday that it could accept certain elements of the plan, notably the release of Israeli hostages, both living and deceased. This marks a rare public response to Trump's stringent demands for peace.
Yet, the group’s statement comes with heavy caveats, suggesting that other aspects of the 20-point plan need further discussion among Palestinian factions. Their hesitation on key demands like disarmament and relinquishing power hints at deep-rooted obstacles to any lasting truce.
President Trump set a firm deadline of Sunday at 6 p.m. Washington time for Hamas to fully accept the proposal. Failure to comply, he warned, would unleash severe consequences, including a green light for Israel to intensify its military operations in Gaza City.
This ultimatum follows Trump’s unveiling of the plan on Monday, which demands an immediate ceasefire and Hamas laying down its arms. Fighters who renounce violence could receive amnesty or safe passage to third countries, a pragmatic if contentious offer.
The plan also stipulates the release of hostages taken during Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, numbering 20 living and 28 deceased. In return, Israel would free Palestinian prisoners, a reciprocal gesture meant to build trust.
Hamas’s response, while a step forward, is far from the full acceptance Trump demanded. They reiterated a willingness to transfer power to an independent Palestinian body, but only under terms aligned with a unified Palestinian stance and international law.
On the issue of Gaza’s future and Palestinian rights, Hamas insisted on broader consultation with other factions. Their statement, as shared by the White House on social media, included a pledge to contribute “with full responsibility,” a phrase that feels more like posturing than commitment.
Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a staunch supporter of Israel, didn’t mince words in his critique on X, calling Hamas’s reply a “classic ‘Yes, but.’” He pointed out their refusal to disarm and their push to keep Gaza under Palestinian control as fundamental rejections of Trump’s all-or-nothing approach.
Trump’s vision for post-conflict Gaza involves a local government of Palestinian bureaucrats overseen by an international “Board of Peace,” with Trump himself as chairman alongside figures like former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. The Palestinian Authority, currently governing the West Bank, would only assume control of Gaza after significant reforms.
This structure aims to dismantle Hamas’s grip on power, a goal many see as essential to lasting stability but fraught with practical challenges. Forcing such a drastic overhaul without buy-in from key players risks further alienating those needed at the table.
Hamas’s insistence on a unified Palestinian position suggests they won’t easily cede influence, even under international oversight. Their stance could stall negotiations, leaving hostages and civilians in limbo as the clock ticks toward Sunday’s deadline.
A ceasefire, if achieved, would open the door to desperately needed humanitarian aid for nearly two million Palestinians facing hunger and displacement in Gaza. Both sides respecting a truce could shift the focus from destruction to rebuilding, though trust remains in short supply.
Israel’s readiness to release prisoners in exchange for hostages shows a willingness to compromise, but Trump’s threat of escalated military action looms large if Hamas balks. The balance between coercion and diplomacy is delicate, and missteps could ignite an already volatile situation.
With Sunday approaching, the world watches whether Hamas will bend to pressure or dig in further, risking consequences Trump has made abundantly clear. This moment, fragile as it is, tests whether peace can prevail over entrenched conflict, or if Gaza’s suffering will deepen under the weight of failed talks.
