Facing a deadline, Hamas still opposes Board of Peace’s disarmament plan
Hamas militants in Gaza City in February 2025
Liza Rozovsky and Jack Khoury report in Haaretz on 14 April 2026:
The High Representative for the U.S.-led Gaza Board of Peace and the head of Hamas’ negotiating team are expected to meet for a second time on Tuesday in Cairo.
Tuesday marks the deadline given to Hamas to submit its response to the outline for implementing the second phase of U.S. President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, according to a diplomatic source who spoke to Haaretz.
Nickolay Mladenov, a former UN diplomat who was appointed by Trump to be the point man liasioning between the Gaza Strip and the Executive Board of the Board of Peace, met on Monday in Cairo with the head of Hamas’ negotiating team and top organization member Khalil al-Hayya, a day before the deadline.
This second phase calls for the gradual disarmament of Hamas, transfer of control of Gaza to a committee of Palestinian technocrats, the start of reconstruction, and Israeli withdrawal from the Yellow Line to a buffer zone – according to the proposal submitted to Hamas by the Board of Peace last month, which serves as the basis for the current talks.
In the last several days, Hamas leaders have signaled to the various Palestinian factions they have met with in Cairo that the organization isn’t prepared to fully cooperate on disarmament unless it gets a clear commitment that Israel will implement the terms of the Phase One cease-fire.
An official belonging to one of the Palestinian factions, who is in close contact with Hamas, told Haaretz that the Hamas leaders residing in the Gaza Strip, including those of its military wing, categorically refuse to give up their arms. The official said they were insisting on assurances that the humanitarian situation in the Strip would improve or that the technocratic committee would eventually be allowed entry.
A source involved in the discussions said he did not believe that talks would lead to a breakthrough, noting that the board had no leverage to pressure Hamas, adding that the deadline given to Hamas was a “soft” one that would likely be extended again.
The New York Times had reported that the organization was supposed to have responded by the end of last week, but Haaretz has learned that the deadline was extended despite Israeli objections. In a briefing to the United Nations Security Council, Nickolay Mladenov, director general of Trump’s Board of Peace and high representative for Gaza, said he reserved for himself the right to extend the timetable for implementing the Trump plan.
Hamas’ red lines
Under the disarmament plan, whose content was first reported by Haaretz, Hamas and the other armed groups in Gaza should have surrendered their heavy weaponry and destroyed the tunnel networks under their control within 90 days. After 250 days, they were supposed to give up their light arms. Meanwhile, the Israel Defense Forces were supposed to withdraw to a buffer zone whose boundaries were not defined in the plan.
The plans also called for Hamas fighters who forswore terrorism would be given guarantees for their safety. The private militias supported by Israel were also required to disarm.
Hamas asserts that the terms of phase one are far from completed. Sources in the organization say that Israel hasn’t fulfilled its key obligations, including ensuring that 600 aid trucks can enter Gaza daily, that sufficient numbers of trailers and tents are supplied and that critical equipment is provided for rebuilding civilian infrastructure, such as hospitals and generators. At the same time, they note, Israel attacks and military operations continued, killing hundreds of Palestinian deaths since the cease-fire went into effect.
“Hamas does not rule out moving to the next stage in principle, but conditions it on the full and tangible implementation of previous commitments,” a senior official in one of the Palestinian factions told Haaretz. He added that Hamas is not completely closing the door to a future discussion on the issue of weapons, and that the organization signals a limited willingness to discuss reducing some of its military capabilities. According to him, Hamas is even willing to consider regional or international oversight.
However, Hamas leadership draws clear red lines around their flexibility: an absolute refusal to dismantle small arms as well as opposition to any demand for unilateral disarmament without guarantees, and a rejection of any attempt to link disarmament with continued Israeli presence in the Gaza Strip. Hamas and other factions also emphasize that any future arrangement must include international oversight and assurance mechanisms, involving countries such as Egypt, Qatar and Turkey.
From Hamas’ perspective, weapons are not just a means of fighting Israel, but a central tool in its struggle for survival against armed groups in Gaza not affiliated with the organization, some of which are even supported by Israel.
“In practice, they want Hamas’ weapons but continue to arm militias,” a Hamas activist in Gaza told Haaretz. “There is no horizon for who will be responsible for ongoing security in areas Hamas still controls. Israel, through Mladenov, wants the weapons without any compensation.”
Challenges facing the council
The Board of Peace expects the agreement to be signed this week, but is prepared for the deadline to be postponed for another week or even longer. A significant challenge currently facing the Board is that Hamas is not interested in progress as long as the war in Iran continues and its outcomes are unclear. For Hamas, the war reduces pressure to comply with demands for disarmament.
On the other hand, the Board of Peace is trying to convince Hamas that the war in Iran is an opportunity it must not miss: a period when the attention of Netanyahu’s government and its voters is directed elsewhere, and an agreement including clauses such as amnesty for Hamas members can be passed without significant public opposition in Israel. However, it is not clear if the organization is receptive to these arguments.
Hamas suspects that behind the demand for disarmament lies an attempt to reshape the political system in the Strip, in a way that would lead to its removal from the equation. The organization rejects these efforts even at the cost of renewed fighting. “In Israel, they are asking Hamas to commit suicide or die, so ultimately it’s the same outcome,” a Hamas activist remarked.
Another challenge facing the council is enforcing Israel’s fulfillment of its commitments. To convince Israel to fully open the Rafah crossing for residents to return to the Strip, Mladenov must also convince Egypt to allow unlimited exit of residents to it – which currently seems almost impossible. However, Mladenov stated in a briefing to the UN Security Council that his office is pressing both Egypt and Israel on the matter.
The situation is also complex regarding Israel’s commitment to allowing 600 aid trucks per day. During the war with Iran, the entry of aid was completely halted for several days, and later resumed on a limited scale due to U.S. pressure. For 40 days of the war, the Zikim and Kissufim crossings were closed, trucks entered only through the Kerem Shalom crossing, and their entry was further restricted due to limited opening hours during the Passover holiday.
The amount of aid from the UN and humanitarian organizations that entered Gaza in the past two months decreased to levels similar to those before the cease-fire. A few days ago, Mladenov announced that 600 trucks had again entered the Strip in one day, and emphasized that this should be the standard.
According to him, this achievement required “intensive work” from his team – in other words, significant pressure on Israel. Hamas, for its part, declared that Israel is “escalating its measures” with the aim of starving the Gaza population again – a statement primarily intended to communicate its hardened stance in the Cairo negotiations.
Israel’s Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories says that during the war with Iran, the amount of aid entering Gaza indeed decreased from 600 to about 250 trucks per day, but emphasizes that Israel approved 100 percent of the requests from the UN and international organizations to bring aid into Gaza. According to COGAT, the UN did not restore the number of trucks it requested to its previous level with the onset of the cease-fire with Iran. This, COGAT says, is partly because the UN aims to reduce residents’ dependence on aid and transition to other assistance mechanisms.
Beyond the negotiations with Hamas, the Board of Peace is grappling with budget constraints – council employees, including Mladenov and members of the technocratic committee, only recently received their first salaries, sources familiar with the details told Haaretz, in spite of the fact that the council was launched in January.
A Bank of Palestine account, which holds 20 million dollars for the technocratic committee donated by the United Arab Emirates, is currently inaccessible to the council due to bureaucratic and legal reasons. One source also stated that committee members, who continue to work from Cairo as long as the agreement with Hamas for disarmament has not been signed, cannot purchase the 30 computers needed for their work.
The Board of Peace declined to comment on the budget issues and referred to its response to a Reuters news agency report on a similar matter. That response stated: “The Board of Peace is a lean, execution-focused organization that calls capital as needed. There are no funding constraints. To date, all funding requests have been met immediately and in full.”
This does not address the legal issues preventing the council from accessing the money in their account.
This article is reproduced in its entirety