Trump Announces Gaza Deal but Israel and Hamas Disagree on Withdrawal First

Perspective Analysis

US President Donald Trump announced on July 30 that his newly created Board of Peace had secured a framework for the complete disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups in Gaza. The deal, according to the announcement posted on Truth Social, would unfold in structured phases that also include an Israeli withdrawal from the territory, the establishment of a new Palestinian governing body, and security responsibilities shifting to an International Stabilization Force working alongside a Palestinian police force.

Trump described the outcome as a monumental step toward lasting peace and security, with Gaza no longer serving as a base for attacks on Israel. He credited mediators from Egypt, Qatar and Turkey for their role and thanked his administration team. White House and Board of Peace officials later elaborated that Hamas and Palestinian factions had accepted the full outline for the first time after months of negotiations, including a 20-point plan that began with hostage releases and now moves to demilitarization. Under the reported terms, heavy weapons and tunnels would be handled by the International Stabilization Force, while lighter weapons fall under Palestinian law administered by the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza. Full implementation is expected to take 200 to 300 days, with no stage advancing until the prior one is verified complete.

Hamas has not issued a single public confirmation of the framework as described by Trump. Instead, Ghazi Hamad, a member of Hamas’s negotiating delegation, told Al Jazeera that the movement will not take steps toward disarmament until Israeli forces first withdraw from Gaza. He linked the disarmament question directly to withdrawal and overall reconstruction of the territory, adding that Israel would have no role in the process itself. A separate Hamas source told AFP that the group is still making amendments to the proposal presented by mediators in Cairo and is awaiting an Israeli response. Those amendments reportedly concern the weapons article, with emphasis on restricting and storing heavy weapons, disbanding armed groups, and pairing any measures with simultaneous Israeli withdrawal.

Israeli officials have stated the opposite sequencing. A political source said Israel will not withdraw from the Yellow Line in Gaza before Hamas is fully disarmed and the strip is demilitarized. Israel conveyed reservations that the current 15-point document does not adequately address its demand for complete removal of weapons and tunnels. The same sources stressed that there will be no exceptions for certain weapons or people, and that one authority, one law and one weapon must prevail. An Axios report cited in coverage indicated that any further withdrawal beyond the Yellow Line would occur only after complete disarmament, with Israel also halting targeted killings of Hamas members except in cases of imminent threat.

The framework builds on a ceasefire that took effect in October 2025 following the October 2023 attacks that killed more than 1,200 Israelis and triggered the long war in Gaza. That earlier agreement included hostage and prisoner exchanges and froze front lines in its first phase. Trump’s 20-point plan then introduced the Board of Peace as an international oversight body chaired by the president and including figures such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff and former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. The plan also established the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza as a technocratic body to manage daily affairs during transition. Violence has continued in the interim, with Israeli strikes killing at least four people including two children on July 30 alone, according to Gaza health officials.

The Board of Peace would oversee international funding, coordinate the International Stabilization Force drawn from multiple nations, and supervise redevelopment. Officials involved in the talks described the process as built on zero trust, with verification mechanisms and assurances at every step. They noted intensive planning to eliminate tunnels, collect weapons and shift to construction rather than confrontation. Regional consultations included Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Iran, one official said, would not have favored Hamas entering the agreement, but Hamas recognized its own interests after seeing other Iranian-backed efforts turn into disasters for local populations.

The accounts from different outlets diverge most clearly on the order of withdrawal and disarmament and on how much credit belongs to Trump’s initiative versus the conditions set by Hamas and Israel. Jerusalem Post reporting, drawing on direct statements from Board of Peace officials, presents the agreement as already accepted by Hamas and factions in its entirety, with Israel skeptical yet committed and signed on. Newsweek centers Trump’s personal claim of a historic breakthrough for the Board of Peace and reconstruction, treating the announcement as a major administration achievement while noting an expert’s observation that Hamas has not previously agreed to disarm without withdrawal. Haaretz reports the same announcement but gives greater prominence to Hamas’s precondition that disarmament follows Israeli withdrawal and to Israeli reservations. Middle East Eye leads with Ghazi Hamad’s statement that withdrawal must come first and that Israel will play no role in the disarmament process. Arab News, relying on AFP sourcing from talks in Cairo, describes Hamas as still amending the proposal and records Israel’s refusal to withdraw until full demilitarization, without foregrounding Trump’s role.

No Palestinian media outlet appeared among the reports covering the event. The absence leaves the Palestinian side represented only through statements relayed by Hamas officials to regional or international outlets.

The sequencing disagreement is not a minor detail. Israel’s position, as stated, treats full demilitarization as the non-negotiable precondition for any withdrawal beyond current lines. Hamas’s position, as stated by its negotiator, treats withdrawal as the precondition for any disarmament step. Both sides also describe verification and a new governing structure, yet the order in which those elements occur determines who holds leverage during the transition. Trump’s announcement asserts that a framework exists and implementation can begin in coming weeks, with two weeks set aside for organization after roadmap approval. The detailed official comments in Jerusalem Post reporting indicate that Israel signed on to the original 20-point plan and that Hamas agreed to the full outline, yet the public statements from both Israeli sources and Hamas continue to restate their respective conditions. This suggests the framework may represent an agreed direction rather than a finalized, unconditional pact.