By Spy Uganda
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected a key element of US President Donald Trump’s proposed Gaza peace plan, insisting that Israeli forces will not withdraw from the territory until Hamas is completely and genuinely disarmed.
Netanyahu’s position threatens to complicate efforts to implement the 15-point framework, which envisages the disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups, an Israeli military withdrawal and the reconstruction of Gaza.
Speaking during a cabinet meeting on Sunday, Netanyahu said Israel would not accept arrangements that leave Hamas capable of maintaining its military strength.
“Israel rejects the 15-point document,” Netanyahu said, adding that the Israeli military “will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is genuinely disarmed”.
He said Israel would continue taking action against threats to its forces and citizens until it was satisfied that Hamas had been fully disarmed.
The disagreement centres on the order in which the two sides should fulfil their commitments.
Trump’s Board of Peace said last month that an understanding had been reached for the “complete disarmament” of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza.
Hamas, however, has maintained that the handover of its heavy weapons is tied to Israel ending what it describes as “all forms of aggression” and withdrawing its forces from Gaza.
A Hamas official told the BBC on Sunday that the group remained committed to the agreement and was prepared to engage in implementing the 15-point plan.
The official also called on mediators to ensure that all parties honour the commitments contained in the agreement.
Trump’s plan, unveiled last year, was presented as a framework for ending the conflict and establishing a new political and security arrangement in Gaza.
Among its key elements are the disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups, the withdrawal of Israeli forces, the establishment of the Board of Peace to oversee implementation and the reconstruction of the devastated territory.
Trump recently described Hamas’s reported willingness to disarm as a major step towards what he called lasting peace and security.
However, Netanyahu’s latest comments show that significant differences remain over how the agreement would be implemented.
The Israeli prime minister said discussions with US officials were continuing, acknowledging that Washington had presented ideas on how to move forward.
“They have ideas; some of them are acceptable to us and some are not, and we know how to stand our ground on these matters,” Netanyahu said.
The dispute places Netanyahu in a difficult political position. While the United States remains Israel’s closest ally, members of his right-wing governing coalition have pressed him to maintain a hard line on Hamas and reject concessions they believe could leave the group intact.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir has been among the prominent critics of the proposed arrangement, describing the draft as unacceptable and calling for tougher action.
The diplomatic disagreement comes against the backdrop of a devastating humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
The war began after the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage, according to Israeli figures.
Israel subsequently launched a large-scale military campaign in Gaza.
According to the United Nations, about 1.9 million people, representing roughly 90% of Gaza’s population, have been displaced during the conflict.
Gaza’s health authorities say more than 73,000 people have been killed since the war began. The figures are considered reliable by the United Nations, although they do not distinguish between combatants and civilians.
Israel and Hamas therefore remain divided over one of the most difficult questions facing the proposed peace framework: whether Hamas must fully surrender its weapons before Israeli troops withdraw, or whether disarmament and withdrawal should take place simultaneously or in phases.
For now, Netanyahu’s position is clear that Israel will not leave Gaza on the basis of what he described as a merely “fictitious disarmament”, placing further pressure on US mediators to find a formula acceptable to both sides.
