A fragile Gaza ceasefire — the first phase of a U.S.-brokered plan advanced by President Donald Trump — envisions sidelining Hamas from governance in favor of a transitional technocratic authority, with a possible handover to the Palestinian Authority. But analysts question whether Hamas can truly be removed and argue that accountability for alleged Israeli abuses cannot be deferred.
Hamas has been the de facto governing authority in Gaza since 2007. Under a ceasefire that took effect on October 10, 2025, Israel and Hamas accepted the initial phase of a U.S.-backed proposal that pairs a pause in fighting and hostage-prisoner exchanges with a roadmap to reorganize governance in the strip. The plan, outlined by the Trump administration, foresees a temporary Palestinian technocratic body overseeing day-to-day administration before potential transfer to a reformed Palestinian Authority, alongside a proposed International Stabilization Force to help secure and rebuild Gaza. Trump and regional partners publicly framed the deal as a step toward broader Middle East peace. These elements have been reported by major outlets and reflected in official statements. (reuters.com)
The truce has been tenuous. On October 29, Israeli airstrikes killed more than 100 people in Gaza, according to the enclave’s health authorities, after Israel said an Israeli soldier had been killed during a confrontation in Rafah. Israel later said the ceasefire was back in effect. Independent outlets documented the casualties and sequence of events; Hamas denied responsibility for the soldier’s death. (apnews.com)
Israel’s leaders have insisted that Hamas must disarm and be excluded from Gaza’s future governance; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has repeatedly vowed to pursue Hamas’s disarmament as part of any longer-term arrangement. Hamas has accepted the first-phase ceasefire steps but has rejected immediate disarmament, saying that decisions about governance, reconstruction, and future security must be taken within a broader Palestinian framework. (theguardian.com)
Tareq Baconi — author of Hamas Contained and the new memoir Fire in Every Direction, and president of the board of the Al-Shabaka policy network — cautions against visions of a postwar Gaza without Hamas. In a November 6 interview, he argued that emphasizing Hamas’s disarmament risks obscuring the need for accountability for Israeli actions. “The Israeli regime has committed a genocide for two years, live-streamed for everyone to see… Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal,” he said, adding that “Palestinians are the ones that have to govern Palestinian territory, not this international force.” Baconi also contended that even if Hamas and its weapons were to disappear, the underlying drivers of the conflict would persist. (democracynow.org)
While the genocide characterization is contested, a United Nations Human Rights Council–mandated Commission of Inquiry alleged in September and October that Israel committed four genocidal acts in Gaza and presented its findings to the UN General Assembly; Israel rejects the allegation. Separately, the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former defense minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity during the Gaza war. (reuters.com)
Analysts note that Hamas’s political project and support networks are unlikely to vanish with military pressure alone, pointing to cycles of armed mobilization in the West Bank in recent years and the movement’s deep social roots. Background research and interviews underscore that Hamas’s rise from the 2006 legislative victory to de facto rule in Gaza came with governance burdens over a population of roughly two million, even as the group developed military capabilities under blockade. (cfr.org)
Plan details continue to evolve. Reporting by U.S. and international outlets indicates the proposal includes a multinational force to monitor the truce and help stabilize Gaza while a transitional administration stands up, with an eventual — but not fixed — path toward Palestinian Authority involvement after reforms. Former UK prime minister Tony Blair has been discussed in reporting as a potential figure in a transitional structure — an idea that has drawn skepticism from Palestinians and some Arab states. (washingtonpost.com)
What happens next hinges on whether the ceasefire holds, how the hostage-prisoner exchanges proceed, and whether the parties can agree on later phases — disarmament, governance arrangements, and reconstruction. For now, competing imperatives — Israel’s demand that Hamas give up its weapons, Hamas’s rejection of immediate disarmament, and international calls for accountability — are testing the durability of the plan and the prospects for any enduring political settlement. (theguardian.com)
