Disarmament? Hamas Says ‘Not So Fast’

The Trump administration announced on July 30 that Hamas had agreed to disarm, followed by a phased withdrawal of the IDF from the Gaza Strip, as part of the implementation of the 15-point Gaza peace proposal.

But Hamas announced shortly afterward that it would only begin to disarm after Israel withdrew from Gaza, changing the terms of the deal.

Stay informed with JBN email alerts! Get the latest updates on breaking stories, global events, and community news directly in your inbox.

The deal stipulates clearly that disarmament includes three stages: the yielding of civil authority to the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), which will oversee the day-to-day functioning of civil society; the decommission of weapons, to be completed within two weeks of all parties agreeing to the deal; and the phased withdrawal of the IDF from Gaza, which would be tied to the disarmament of Hamas.

Hamas agreed to this deal, then changed the terms.

“We will not take any steps regarding disarmament before Israel withdraws from the Gaza Strip. We will not implement any measures if the Israeli forces do not fulfill their obligations under the agreement,” senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad announced, pretending that the correct sequence was IDF withdrawal followed by disarmament.

“The issue of weapons is linked to other issues, such as the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip and reconstruction,” he added. “Israel will not interfere in the matter of storing weapons; the National Committee will handle this task.”

“Hamas allegedly agreed to a disarmament deal. Within hours, it rewrote the terms it agreed to,” Honest Reporting posted on X. “The deal required Hamas to disarm, paving the way for an eventual IDF withdrawal. Hamas instead declared it would only disarm after Israel withdrew.”

“This isn’t a misunderstanding. It’s Hamas’ strategy: accept a deal, redefine it, and shift blame onto Israel,” the media watchdog declared.

In a separate article, Honest Reporting pointed out the double standard the mainstream media immediately applied to Israel after President Donald Trump announced that all parties had agreed to the deal.

“The New York Times was quick to question ‘whether Israel and Hamas will comply, despite Israel’s compliance being contingent on Hamas,’” Honest Reporting wrote. “Similarly, France24 and The Telegraph focused exclusively on Israeli strikes in the Gaza Strip after Hamas had reportedly agreed to the deal, implying that Israel was the bad faith actor — not the terrorists whose weapons storage facilities the strikes were targeting.”