Hamas Set to Transfer Arms to New Palestinian State, Senior Official Confirms

Hamas Set to Transfer Arms to New Palestinian State, Senior Official Confirms

In a recent interview with Qatar’s Al Jazeera network, Abu Marzouk, a prominent figure in Hamas, emphasized the group’s commitment to the future of Gaza and the Palestinian people. He stated that Hamas is prepared to hand over its weapons to a future Palestinian state, underscoring that the fate of Gaza is a national issue that cannot be decided by Hamas alone.

Abu Marzouk articulated the group’s stance on the peace process, noting that while Hamas accepts the “main outlines” of Donald Trump’s proposal, its implementation necessitates detailed negotiations through mediators. He remarked, “Hamas will negotiate all issues related to the movement and its weapons,” indicating that discussions will encompass:

  • Peacekeeping force details
  • Operational aspects
  • Governance of Gaza

He further clarified that the arms of the resistance group would be transferred “to whoever governs Gaza within the coming Palestinian state.” In his remarks, he emphasized, “The future of our people is a national question,” urging the United States to “look positively at the future of the Palestinian people.”

Abu Marzouk also confirmed a “national agreement” to transition Gaza’s administration to independent figures who align with the Palestinian Authority. He firmly rejected any attempts to label Hamas as a terrorist organization, maintaining that it is fundamentally a “national liberation movement.”

In a significant development, Hamas has expressed approval for the release of all Israeli captives and the delivery of bodies, alongside the transfer of Gaza’s administration to a neutral Palestinian technocratic body, as part of its response to Trump’s plan. The group insists that other elements of the proposal, particularly those addressing Gaza’s future and the rights of the Palestinian people, must be collectively decided by all national factions and adhere to international law.

Palestinian sources, as reported by Anadolu, reveal that Hamas has submitted its formal response to mediators, actively seeking clarifications on various clauses within the proposal. The group has engaged in “in-depth consultations within its leadership and with Palestinian factions, mediators, and allies” before finalizing its position.

The White House plan, unveiled on September 29, outlines several key points aimed at stabilizing the region:

  1. Immediate ceasefire
  2. Reconstruction of Gaza
  3. Creation of a transitional governance mechanism to manage Gaza’s political and security affairs

This proposal seeks to establish Gaza as a “weapons-free zone,” overseen by an international body, with Trump himself directing the efforts. In a recent statement, Trump remarked that Hamas’s response indicates a willingness for “lasting peace,” calling on Israel to “immediately stop bombing Gaza so that hostages can be freed safely.”

He further noted, “This is not only about Gaza; this is about long-sought peace in the Middle East.”

Since the escalation of violence in October 2023, Israel’s ongoing bombardment and siege have tragically resulted in the deaths of nearly 66,300 Palestinians, predominantly women and children, leaving the enclave in a state of devastation. The 2.4 million residents of Gaza are currently living under a stringent blockade that has severely restricted access to food, medicine, and fuel, leading to famine-like conditions described by UN agencies as catastrophic.

Human rights organizations have consistently condemned the Israeli regime for what they characterize as collective punishment and systematic war crimes. Meanwhile, the Palestinian resistance asserts that any genuine peace must commence with the cessation of occupation, the lifting of the blockade, and the restoration of the rights of the Palestinian people.

As the situation evolves, the international community watches closely, hoping for a resolution that ensures peace and justice for all parties involved.

Similar Posts

  • Lebanon Leaders Condemn US Envoy’s Interference Remarks Amid Rising Tensions

    Morgan Ortagus, the US Deputy Envoy to the Middle East, asserted that Hezbollah should not be part of Lebanon’s future government, sparking backlash from Lebanese officials. During her meeting with President Joseph Aoun, she described Hezbollah’s inclusion as a “red line” for the US, prompting strong condemnation from Hezbollah representatives. Mohammad Raad, head of Hezbollah’s political wing, criticized Ortagus’s remarks as irresponsible and labeled Hezbollah an integral part of Lebanon’s political fabric. The US has been reportedly pressuring Lebanese leaders to limit Hezbollah’s influence, highlighting the ongoing struggle for power amid external pressures in Lebanon’s complex political landscape.

  • This article will be expanded soon. This article will be expanded soon. This article will be expanded with more detailed information shortly. This article will be expanded with more detailed information shortly. This article will be expanded with more detailed information shortly. This article will be expanded with more detailed information shortly.

  • Tehran’s Political Turmoil: Urgent Issues Ignored Amidst Infighting

    As global focus shifts to nuclear diplomacy, Iran’s internal politics are bogged down by minor disputes, hindering efforts to tackle significant economic challenges. The rial dropped 4% following Supreme Leader Khamenei’s doubts about U.S. negotiations, underscoring economic volatility. Recent debates have centered on changing office hours, rejected by Parliament amidst public backlash over early start times. The economy minister position remains vacant, with concerns that potential candidates may not offer effective solutions. President Pezeshkian’s administration faces declining public support, exacerbated by rising internet fees. As anxiety over military conflict grows, satire on social media reflects public discontent with the government’s focus on trivial matters.

  • EU Troika’s Snapback Decision on Iran: Unjustified Action Sparks Controversy

    Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi addressed lawmakers about the ongoing Iran-E3 talks in Istanbul, focusing on the potential invocation of the controversial snapback mechanism. This mechanism could reinstate six UN Security Council resolutions from 2006-2010, leading to severe consequences such as an arms embargo, bans on arms exports, export controls, travel bans, and asset freezes. Gharibabadi emphasized Iran’s response strategies and conveyed a message from Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asserting that the E3 lacks the authority to initiate snapback related to the 2015 nuclear deal. He highlighted the importance of Iran’s rights, particularly regarding uranium enrichment and sanctions relief.

  • Hamas Agrees to New Ceasefire Proposal Brokered by Egypt and Qatar: A Path to Peace?

    Hamas has tentatively agreed to a new ceasefire proposal with Israel, mediated by Egypt and Qatar, though an official statement is pending. Previous ceasefire agreements have often been disregarded by Israel, leading to further conflict and humanitarian crises in Gaza. The primary issue remains the duration of the ceasefire, with Hamas seeking a permanent halt and Israel favoring temporary pauses. Recent history reveals Israel’s frequent violations of ceasefires, exacerbating civilian suffering. For a lasting peace, both parties must address fundamental issues, including mutual understanding of ceasefire terms, prisoner releases, humanitarian aid access, and trust-building commitments.

  • Russia Unveils Strategic Draft Proposal to Halt ‘Snapback’ Activation: Key Insights Revealed

    Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN, Dmitry Polyanski, stressed the importance of extending Resolution 2231, set to expire in October, during a recent press conference. This resolution impacts Iran’s nuclear program and could lead to the reimposition of sanctions if not extended. Polyanski highlighted the contrasting positions of Russia and China, advocating for diplomacy, versus the European trio (UK, France, Germany) aligning with the U.S. in reinstating sanctions. He emphasized the need for peace over war and suggested that the proposal’s acceptance would reveal the true intentions of nations regarding diplomatic efforts with Iran.