{
  "id": 27653,
  "title": "Hamas disarmament cannot wait for the IDF's withdrawal from Gaza - editorial",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/02/hamas-disarmament-cannot-wait-for-the-idfs-withdrawal-from-gaza",
  "topic": "world",
  "section": "World",
  "published": "2026-08-02T05:01:12.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Jerusalem Post",
    "slug": "jerusalem-post",
    "url": "https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-904275"
  },
  "original_language": "en",
  "account": "The latest Gaza proposal is a step forward compared to the empty rhetoric that has dominated recent discussions. It tackles key issues such as Hamas' weapons, the network of tunnels, the command structure, the future governance of Gaza, and the connection between disarming Hamas and Israel's withdrawal.\n\nHowever, this proposal falls short in one crucial aspect. Israel cannot agree to any process that assumes Hamas will disarm at a later date. The essence of the issue isn't whether disarmament is mentioned in the document, but whether Hamas is obligated to fulfill this requirement before Israel relinquishes the leverage necessary to make it happen.\n\nSince October 7, Hamas has used every negotiation to gain time, maintain control, and push difficult questions to the next phase. While these talks have achieved significant results, most notably the return of hostages, Hamas' military strength has remained largely unscathed by diplomacy. Throughout these negotiations, Hamas has repeatedly refused disarmament, qualified it, or presented alternative interpretations that keep its weapons under a different guise or authority.\n\nThe current proposal may appear more substantial, but it still relies on a sequence of events. If Hamas continues to hold onto its weapons while a new Palestinian committee takes shape in Gaza, international bodies begin their work, and Israeli forces begin their withdrawal, the outcome could be a civilian administration operating under the same threat that has characterized Gaza for years. This arrangement would essentially perpetuate the conditions that have prevailed in the region.\n\nIsrael's withdrawal cannot be contingent on Hamas' assurances. The United States must exercise caution not to conflate a framework with actual implementation. While titles, ceremonies, international boards, and public declarations might facilitate negotiations, they do not eliminate rockets, dismantle tunnels, or deter Hamas from rebuilding its capabilities. Israel cannot base its withdrawal on Hamas' stated intentions to disarm.\n\nThe standard must be both physical and verifiable. Weapons must be collected and rendered unusable, while production sites and tunnel networks must be identified and destroyed. Smuggling routes, command structures, and financing systems must be dismantled. Inspectors need to have unrestricted access to facilities, and any violations must automatically halt the subsequent stages.\n\nHumanitarian aid, such as food, medicine, water, shelter, and basic services, should reach civilians, irrespective of Hamas' behavior. Moreover, this assistance must be provided without inadvertently bolstering Hamas' grip on power. Large-scale reconstruction offers numerous benefits, including financial gains, employment opportunities, contracts, and influence. However, if reconstruction commences while Hamas remains armed, there is a risk of rebuilding the very system that facilitated the organization's infiltration into every aspect of life in Gaza. Reconstruction should commence in areas that have been independently verified as demilitarized, where a civilian authority can operate without facing armed intimidation.\n\nIt is crucial to recognize that Palestinians deserve the opportunity to live peacefully. However, Hamas is not representative of the Palestinian people, and it has failed to improve their lives. The organization ascended to power through force, suppressed dissent, restricted political options, and constructed a society centered around warfare rather than public welfare. If Hamas had prioritized the well-being of Palestinians, Gaza would have been a vastly different place even before October 7.\n\nThe anti-Hamas militias and clans that have emerged in parts of Gaza demonstrate that the population is not monolithic in its political views. Nevertheless, they do not constitute a viable alternative. These groups are fragmented, locally based, and in some cases, accused of criminal activities, looting, or abuse. Gaza cannot transition from Hamas' rule to governance by competing armed factions. Any future system must apply the principle of one civilian authority, with no independent militias.\n\nUltimately, Palestinians and Israelis both deserve a real chance to live under a government that is not preparing for the next conflict. Hamas must relinquish its military power, as well as the ability to build new tunnels and launch further attacks. Diplomacy and humanitarian relief should persist, and a Palestinian civilian administration should be established. However, these measures alone cannot facilitate Hamas' departure from the conflict with its weapons, coercive influence, and capacity to reignite hostilities. The decisive factor is whether Hamas is genuinely disarmed.",
  "summary": "Palestinians deserve a chance to live under a government that is not preparing for the next war; Israelis deserve to know that an IDF withdrawal will not be followed by rearmament and another attack.",
  "key_points": [],
  "editors_take": null,
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}