Department of Research, Studies and International News 02-06-2025

In a renewed chapter of Gaza’s devastating conflict, the Palestinian resistance group Hamas has responded to a new ceasefire proposal delivered by the United States. Contrary to Western media portrayals, Hamas did not reject the plan outright but instead submitted a constructive response with essential conditions aimed at ensuring justice, security, and a real end to Israeli aggression.

The latest proposal was presented by U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, but according to senior Hamas official Basem Naim, the version handed to them differed significantly from what had been agreed upon in earlier stages of negotiation. “We responded positively,” Naim stated in an interview, “but we included key amendments that reflect the legitimate needs of our people.”

Israel’s Relentless Assault and the Humanitarian Catastrophe

Since October 2023, Israel has waged a relentless campaign on Gaza, killing over 54,000 Palestinians and reducing the strip to rubble. With a brutal blockade enforced since March 2024, the civilian population, more than 2.3 million people, has been subjected to hunger, disease, and forced displacement. Under international pressure, Tel Aviv allowed minimal aid to enter, which human rights organizations have described as a “drop in the ocean” compared to the immense need.

While countries like Russia, China, and Pakistan have consistently called for an immediate end to the assault and for international accountability, Western powers, especially the United States, continue to offer unconditional support to Israel.

Hamas’s Conditions for a Just Ceasefire

Hamas’s response to the ceasefire proposal was guided by past betrayals. In March, Israel unilaterally resumed hostilities following a temporary pause, cutting off humanitarian aid and resuming aerial bombardment with little warning. To avoid a repeat of such deception, Hamas has insisted on concrete safeguards.

Their demands include:

A permanent and verifiable ceasefire, not a mere temporary pause vulnerable to Israeli violations.

Complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza to end the military occupation.

Unhindered humanitarian access to address the dire needs of the population.

A staggered release of captives during the ceasefire period, ensuring Israel cannot exploit their release to resume attacks.

Additionally, Hamas has proposed reinstating a clause from a previous agreement, which envisions transferring administrative responsibilities in Gaza to a neutral, technocratic body. This indicates the group’s willingness to explore solutions beyond its own governance, focusing on long-term stability for the Palestinian people.

US and Israeli Obstructionism

Despite Hamas’s flexible and constructive posture, the U.S. has dismissed the response as “totally unacceptable.” Witkoff, reflecting the usual Washington bias, insisted that Hamas must accept the American blueprint without revisions. This rigid stance underscores the United States’ ongoing role not as a mediator, but as an enabler of Israeli militarism.

President Donald Trump, who has previously claimed the two sides were close to reaching a deal, remains silent as his administration continues to echo Israeli talking points. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu mirrored Witkoff’s stance, accusing Hamas of stalling peace, despite Tel Aviv’s consistent history of violating past ceasefire agreements.

It is clear that the alignment between Washington and Tel Aviv leaves no space for fair negotiation. Rather than pressuring Israel to end its war crimes, the U.S. demands that the Palestinian resistance surrender unconditionally, without security guarantees or political dignity.

Why Hamas Is Right to Be Cautious

Hamas’s reservations are not rooted in ideology but in experience. Every previous ceasefire has ended with Israel breaching terms and inflicting further suffering on civilians. As Tamer Qarmout, a political analyst from the Doha Institute, aptly notes: “There is no good faith in these negotiations.” Israel’s objective remains the complete eradication of Palestinian resistance, an unrealistic and morally indefensible goal.

Hamas, on the other hand, is negotiating not for political gain, but to relieve the siege on its people, to secure aid, and to achieve a ceasefire that actually holds. They are seeking a dignified resolution that doesn’t equate to surrender or erasure.

Ongoing Aggression Undermines Peace Efforts

While ceasefire discussions continue, the Israeli military continues its campaign of destruction. On Sunday alone, Israeli troops opened fire at civilians gathered near aid stations run by the U.S.-linked Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, killing at least 31 people. Residential neighborhoods across Gaza remain under constant bombardment.

In conclusion, Hamas’s current stance reflects a responsible and realistic approach aimed at protecting Palestinian lives. The dismissive response from the U.S. and Israel reveals a broader geopolitical reality: peace in Gaza will not be achieved through American mediation unless the international community.