Hamas and Israel Move Towards US-Brokered Gaza Peace Deal

3 October, 2025

Hamas has accepted elements of a US-led peace plan, agreeing to release all Israeli hostages, while Israel prepares to implement the first stage. The plan, brokered by US President Donald Trump, calls for an immediate halt to Israeli bombing to facilitate hostage release. The deal would see Hamas disarm and cede power in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal and an influx of aid. While key disagreements remain, the development is a significant step towards ending the nearly two-year conflict in the region.

Unpacked:

What specific steps does the US-led peace plan propose for the transition of power in Gaza after Hamas disarms?

The plan calls for Hamas to disarm and cede power, with Gaza temporarily governed by Palestinian technocrats under international supervision, leading to a transitional administration. Large-scale reconstruction and humanitarian aid would follow, supported by an international stabilization force. The process is designed to create conditions for eventual Palestinian self-governance, but details on long-term political structures remain to be negotiated, with Israel and regional partners closely involved in oversight.

How have key regional and international actors responded to this latest development in the peace process?

Many countries, including France, Germany, Russia, the UAE, Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, Jordan, and the UK, have expressed support for the US-led proposal, viewing it as a potential breakthrough. However, Hamas had previously rejected core elements like demilitarization, and its current willingness to negotiate marks a shift. Israel's government has signaled cautious optimism but remains firm on security demands, while the US emphasizes its commitment to ensuring Israel's safety throughout implementation.

What are the main unresolved issues that could still derail the agreement?

Key disagreements include the extent of Hamas’s disarmament, the timeline and conditions for Israeli withdrawal, the composition and mandate of the international stabilization force, and the political future of Gaza. Hamas’s acceptance of the plan is partial, and both sides retain leverage—Israel could resume military action if terms are violated, while Hamas may resist full demilitarization or external governance. Trust deficits and past ceasefire collapses add to the fragility of the current deal.

How does this proposal differ from previous attempts to resolve the Gaza conflict?

Unlike earlier ceasefires that focused on temporary truces, this plan aims for a comprehensive settlement: Hamas disarms and relinquishes control, Israel withdraws, hostages are returned, and a transitional administration takes over with international support. Previous deals lacked enforceable mechanisms for disarmament or political transition, often collapsing when violence resumed. The current proposal also ties reconstruction and aid directly to compliance, offering clearer incentives for sustained peace.