By SCM International Desk I Sunday, August 23,2026
BEIRUT, Lebanon — A senior Hamas official declared that the militant group will not consider itself bound by any provisions of a proposed Gaza peace framework unless Israel publicly commits to the agreement and begins fulfilling its core obligations, including halting military strikes and withdrawing forces from the enclave.
Speaking on an Iraqi podcast released this week, Osama Hamdan, a prominent Hamas leader, disclosed details of communications conveyed to U.S. envoy Jared Kushner during high-level meetings.
Hamdan emphasized that the group’s participation in any stage of the framework remains strictly conditional on Israeli compliance.
“The ball is now in the occupation’s court and with the mediators,” Hamdan said, placing the onus directly on Israeli leadership and international interlocutors to secure formal commitments.
Stance on Arsenal and Governance
Addressing one of the most contentious elements of the diplomatic efforts—the fate of Hamas’s weapons arsenal—Hamdan firmly rejected demands for total surrender or external handover.
Instead, he outlined a proposal where heavy arms would remain within Palestinian hands but undergo strict regulation. Under the proposed arrangement, heavy weaponry would be restricted and placed under the authority of a designated Palestinian administrative committee governing Gaza.
Hamdan explicitly noted that:
No weapons would be turned over to non-Palestinian entities or foreign stabilizing forces.
No military fire originating from Gaza would be directed across the border once the framework takes effect.
Negotiations over the precise mechanisms for collecting and storing heavy weapons would only commence after Israel formally accepts the broader framework—a process he warned would take time to resolve.
The broader framework referenced by Hamdan encompasses a complete end to the Israeli blockade, a full military withdrawal, the continuation of local Palestinian administrative and security services, and the dismantling of intelligence networks collaborating with Israel.
The comments come amid intense, delicate diplomatic engagements led by U.S. representatives to establish a sustainable peace framework and transition structure for post-conflict Gaza.
Recent rounds of regional discussions involving U.S. envoys, Israeli leaders, and regional mediators have focused heavily on security arrangements, governance, and decommissioning military assets.
Diplomatic efforts face continuous strain due to fundamental disagreements over sequence and terms. While Israel has consistently demanded the complete disarmament of Hamas and the total eradication of its military infrastructure before agreeing to complete troop withdrawals, Hamas maintains that weapon storage mechanisms can only be negotiated within the context of guaranteed Israeli military withdrawal and an end to all operations.
Hamdan’s public statement underscores the lingering rift between the negotiating parties, signaling that without a visible shift in Israel’s public positioning, the execution of the broader framework remains stalled.
