Hawzah News Agency- What has been announced to date is not a decision by Hamas to surrender its weapons, nor the initiation of such a step. What stands before us is the Palestinian side's acceptance of a negotiating framework—one laden with rigorous conditions that make any process of restricting and storing heavy weaponry contingent upon the occupying regime's full implementation of the first phase's commitments.
These commitments include a complete halt to attacks, bombardments, and assassination operations; a withdrawal to the so-called "Yellow Line" and a pullout from areas occupied over recent months; the facilitation of a Palestinian national committee and an international stabilization force; and the full execution of the humanitarian protocol—encompassing the entry of aid, shelter for the displaced, rubble removal, and the reconstruction of vital infrastructure, including electricity and water networks.
The proposed Palestinian framework rests on three core principles: gradualism, simultaneity, and verification. No phase will commence before the preceding one is completed. Crucially, the responsibility for restricting and storing weapons will lie with a Palestinian body, and the arms will remain inside the Gaza Strip—not surrendered to the occupying regime or any external party.
From a political standpoint, this degree of flexibility can be interpreted as an effort to shield the resistance project from another existential war and to buy time until the Israeli elections on October 27 and the U.S. presidential election on November 3, 2026. In this equation, time itself is a strategic asset—one that grants Gaza a vital respite to recover and await regional shifts and changes in the balance of power.
Conversely, the likelihood of Netanyahu, in the heat of an election campaign, fully honoring his commitments appears slim. Any Israeli violation of the terms will halt the phased process and allow the resistance to declare the agreement breached and effectively nullified. Under such circumstances, a significant portion of the political and legal pretexts used to resume war would also evaporate.
The historical experience of the Palestinian resistance further demonstrates that ceasefires and phased agreements have repeatedly served as instruments to recalibrate priorities, restore capabilities, and preserve elements of power. Likewise, the experience in Lebanon following UN Resolution 1701 proved that restrictions imposed on military deployments south of the Litani River did not lead to complete disarmament; Hezbollah subsequently managed to rebuild and even expand its capabilities in the years that followed.
Therefore, the central question today is not "When will Hamas hand over its weapons?" but rather: "Will the occupying regime even fulfill the obligations upon which the initiation of this process depends, or will the acceptance of this framework stall precisely at the point where real retreats must begin?"
By Hossein Pak
Your Comment