USA Agreement for Hamas Disarmament: Strategic Implications and Future Challenges

A New Day for Gaza? The US-Hamas Deal and Its Complex Implications

The US-led Board of Peace has announced an agreement that could lead to the disarmament of Hamas and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, nearly three years after Hamas's October 7 terrorist attack against Israel that sparked a conflict that has shaken the region and the world. Hamas officials have confirmed their acceptance of the agreement, but Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has yet to take a position.

The details are complex, and the road ahead is winding. We've consulted our experts to answer the most pressing questions about the agreement and its broader consequences.

What Has Hamas Exactly Accepted?

Less than twenty-four hours after the formal statements of US President Donald Trump on Truth Social and Gaza Representative Nickolay Mladenov on X, what Hamas has exactly accepted remains a question mark.

The biggest question is whether the agreement commits Hamas to renouncing not only heavy weapons—such as rockets—but also light and personal weapons, like AK-47 rifles and pistols. Another question is how the disarmament process will unfold. Point 6 of Trump's original twenty-point plan implies that even light weapons must be dismantled. But a Hamas official said the agreement requires Israel to halt all military conduct, the deployment of an international force, and self-determination, establishing an independent Palestinian state.

A cynical reading would be that Hamas knows that Israeli officials—especially three months before a national election—are unlikely to accept an agreement, which offers the group an opportunity to shift blame for the current stalemate onto Trump's twenty-point plan on Jerusalem. But two things can be true at the same time. And such a reading also risks underestimating the amount of pressure that Hamas—and its newly formalized leader, Khalil al-Hayya—are currently under from regional mediators, particularly Qatar and Egypt. Moreover, Hamas does not know how the war in Iran will end or whether it will still have a patron in Tehran willing and able to provide the group with money and capabilities.

At the same time, Israel's withdrawal to the so-called "Yellow Line" as a first step of the agreement—something Israeli officials have already said they would not do—is only one of the complex reciprocal steps and sequencing challenges that mediators will have to implement.

Lost in the conversation about weapons, the agreement is also intended to ensure that the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG) can enter and take over civilian control of the strip. This would necessarily mean that the Hamas-dominated police force hands over its weapons to the NCAG, a step that would further demilitarize the group and begin to allow the people of Gaza to escape the group's brutality and domination.

The ambiguity about what is and is not included could help square the circle to allow the announcement of an agreement. But as demonstrated by the recent US memorandum of understanding with Iran, if the parties do not agree on what is being committed, no public statement, however strong and hopeful, will be sufficient to change the circumstances on the ground.

What Are the Regional Implications of the Agreement?

The disarmament and withdrawal agreement from Gaza could have significant repercussions throughout the Middle East. For Iran, a historic supporter of Hamas, it represents a strategic defeat that could weaken its influence in the region. Tehran could respond by increasing support for other militant groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon or Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria. On the other hand, the Gulf States, particularly Qatar and Saudi Arabia, could see the agreement as an opportunity to strengthen their influence over Gaza. Qatar, which hosts the Hamas base, already plays a key role in mediation, but a possible Israeli withdrawal could push Riyadh to move closer to Tel Aviv, accelerating the normalization of relations between Israel and the Arab world. Erdogan's Turkey, which has recently improved relations with Israel, could instead seek to assume a leadership role in the reconstruction of Gaza, using the occasion to strengthen its influence in the region and counter Iranian expansion.

How Could It Influence the Israeli-Palestinian Peace Process?

The agreement represents a crucial moment for the peace process. If successfully implemented, it could pave the way for broader negotiations on fundamental issues such as the status of Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, and the creation of a Palestinian state. However, the risks are high. The Israeli far-right, already strongly opposed to the agreement, could use any failures in implementation to demand a return to more aggressive policies. At the same time, a fragmentation of the Palestinian movement between those supporting disarmament and those considering it a surrender could further weaken the Palestinian National Authority.

What Are the Immediate Humanitarian Challenges?

With over 1.7 million displaced and a collapsing healthcare system, Gaza faces an unprecedented humanitarian crisis. The agreement could allow for an increase in international aid, but reconstruction will require time and resources. International organizations will have to work under extremely difficult conditions, needing to ensure the security of personnel and aid. Moreover, the distribution of resources will need to be managed transparently to prevent Hamas or other groups from taking advantage.

What Is the Role of the United States and the EU?

The United States, under Trump's leadership, has a strategic interest in the success of the agreement, which could strengthen his position ahead of the elections. The American administration will have to carefully manage pressures on Israel, avoiding alienating Netanyahu's right wing. The European Union, which has already funded numerous reconstruction projects in Gaza, could increase its commitment, but it will need to coordinate with regional actors to avoid duplication and maximize impact. In particular, Brussels will need to work to ensure that funds do not end up in the hands of militant groups.

What Are the Possible Scenarios?

1. Optimistic Scenario: The agreement is successfully implemented, Hamas disarms, Israel withdraws, and Gaza begins a reconstruction process led by the international community. This could pave the way for broader negotiations on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 2. Realistic Scenario: The agreement encounters obstacles, with Hamas seeking to maintain a military presence or Israel delaying withdrawal. This could lead to a stalemate, with periodic violence but no definitive solutions. 3. Pessimistic Scenario: The agreement fails, triggering a new escalation of violence. Hamas could resume attacks against Israel, while Tel Aviv could launch a new military offensive in Gaza, further worsening the humanitarian crisis. In any scenario, the international community will have a crucial role in ensuring that the parties respect their commitments and that the civilian population of Gaza is not abandoned.