[link removed]


** Hamas Has No Intention of Disarming — So Why Is the US Still Negotiating? ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------

by Khaled Abu Toameh • September 3, 2026 at 5:00 am
* Hamas official Osama Hamdan recently said, "No one said that we will hand over our weapons." According to Hamdan, the word "hand over" was never part of the agreement his terrorist group reached with the mediators. Instead, Hamdan said, the agreed framework calls for the "containment and storage" of Hamas's heavy weapons. He added that this would be carried out by the Palestinian Committee for the Administration of Gaza and the Palestinian "resistance factions."
* Hamas... is talking about keeping its weapons.
* When [senior Hamas official Ghazi] Hamad's interviewer asked him, "Does that mean the annihilation of Israel?," Hamad responded, "Yes, of course."
* Hamas cannot have it both ways. It cannot demand an end to Israel's military presence in Gaza while simultaneously insisting on retaining the weapons that it has used — and clearly plans to use again — to attack Israel. The victims of Hamas's weapons have a say in the matter too.
* The question is not who gets to decide what happens to Hamas's weapons. The question is why Hamas should be allowed to keep them at all.
* Hamas is essentially saying: First give us political power and remove Israelis forces from the Gaza Strip. Afterward, we may discuss what happens to our weapons.
* Hamas's laying down its weapons and relinquishing its political and military control over the Gaza Strip must be unconditional. Hamas is a terrorist organization that launched the October 7, 2023 invasion and massacre. It is not a sovereign state entitled to negotiate the terms of its own disarmament.
* Trump's 20-Point Gaza Peace Plan calls for the "demilitarization" of the Gaza Strip and the "decommissioning" of weapons. Point 13 states:
* "Hamas and other factions agree to not have any role in the governance of Gaza, directly, indirectly, or in any form. All military, terror, and offensive infrastructure, including tunnels and weapon production facilities, will be destroyed and not rebuilt. There will be a process of demilitarization of Gaza under the supervision of independent monitors, which will include placing weapons permanently beyond use through an agreed process of decommissioning, and supported by an internationally funded buy back and reintegration program all verified by the independent monitors."
* Yet somehow, nearly three years after October 7, the discussion has apparently moved from demilitarization and decommissioning to "containment" and "storage."
* Who will guarantee that Hamas terrorists will not simply take them out of storage when they decide that the time has come to resume their jihad (holy war) against Israel?
* Would the new Palestinian Committee for the Administration of Gaza really be capable of preventing Hamas and other terrorist groups from accessing these weapons? Would foreign troops... be expected to stand guard over weapons belonging to terrorist organizations and prevent them from storming the warehouses?
* Was al-Qaeda ever asked to "contain" its weapons? Was ISIS ever asked to "store" its weapons? Terrorist organizations are supposed to be disarmed. Their weapons are supposed to be confiscated and destroyed. There is no legitimate reason for Hamas or any other Palestinian terrorist faction to possess weapons either in the Gaza Strip or in any other territory.
* Palestinians do not need rockets, explosive drones and anti-tank missiles to build a better future. They need economic development and accountable institutions.
* Why are the United States and other mediators talking to Hamas about elections when the organization has not even agreed to genuine disarmament?
* Time is on Hamas's side, or so its leaders might calculate. US presidents come and go. Administrations change. International attention shifts. Why surrender weapons today if Hamas can simply wait and see who occupies the White House tomorrow?
* Allowing Hamas-affiliated candidates to participate in Palestinian elections while it retains its weapons would create the absurd situation of a terrorist organization being permitted to transform its military power into political power — a perfect recipe for legitimizing Hamas.
* So why is Washington still negotiating the terms? Striking deals with Islamist terrorist organizations is not a substitute for enforcing their disarmament. Agreements that allow terrorists to keep their weapons are not worth the paper on which they are written.
* Hamas must be eliminated as a political and military entity. Its weapons must be confiscated or destroyed, not "stored", "contained," or hidden. Until that happens, Hamas remains armed, Iran remains influential, and the threat of another October 7 massacre — or more — remains in the works.

Hamas official Osama Hamdan said, "No one said that we will hand over our weapons." According to Hamdan, the word "hand over" was never part of the agreement his terrorist group reached with the mediators. Instead, Hamdan said, the agreed framework calls for the "containment and storage" of Hamas's heavy weapons. Hamas's laying down its weapons and relinquishing its political and military control over the Gaza Strip must be unconditional. Hamas is a terrorist organization that launched the October 7, 2023 invasion and massacre. It is not a sovereign state entitled to negotiate the terms of its own disarmament. Pictured: Hamdan on a podcast on November 10, 2025. (Image source: MEMRI)

Hamas, like its long-time benefactor Iran, has once again made its position unmistakably clear: It has no intention of surrendering its weapons, abandoning its armed "resistance" against Israel, or relinquishing control over the Gaza Strip.

If anyone in Washington or elsewhere still believes that Hamas has agreed to disarm under the Gaza peace plan presented by US President Donald J. Trump and his Board of Peace, they should listen carefully to what Hamas officials themselves are saying.

Two recent interviews with senior Hamas officials leave little room for doubt.

Continue Reading Article ([link removed])

============================================================
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** RSS ([link removed])
** Donate ([link removed])
Copyright © Gatestone Institute, All rights reserved.

You are subscribed to this list as [email protected]

You can change how you receive these emails:
** Update your subscription preferences ([link removed])
or ** Unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])

** Gatestone Institute ([link removed])

14 East 60 St., Suite 705, New York, NY 10022