Hamas says it would disarm only if Israel halts strikes and withdraws from Gaza and a Palestinian state is established, but “obstacles remain”

Hamas said it is willing to disarm, but only if Israel first halts its strikes and withdraws from Gaza and if political conditions for a Palestinian state are met, according to a statement reported Tuesday by PBS NewsHour. The group also said the process would not be immediate, describing the laying down of its heavy weapons as something that would come later in the sequence.

Under Hamas’s framework, the timing of disarmament depends on whether Israel carries out steps that would materially change the security environment on the ground. Hamas said the first stage would require Israel to stop attacks and withdraw from Gaza, changes the group presented as prerequisites for any later movement toward disarmament.

PBS NewsHour reported that Hamas framed its eventual willingness to lay down heavy weapons as contingent on the creation of a Palestinian state. In the statement described by the outlet, Hamas linked the end-state political outcome to the group’s ability to move from active armed capability toward disarmament.

Israel’s current government rejects the creation of a Palestinian state as a basis for resolving the conflict, according to the PBS report. That rejection is presented as one of the major obstacles complicating any transition from fighting to a longer-term political and security arrangement.

The Hamas position also underscores a broader challenge for diplomacy, because it sets conditions not only on battlefield actions like halts and withdrawals, but also on an outcome Israel opposes. Any proposal that attempts to translate the proposal into negotiations would therefore face a fundamental gap between the parties’ stated end goals, not just disagreements about operational details.

In practice, the sequence described by Hamas means negotiations would need to address at least two categories of questions. One concerns security mechanics, including what counts as an adequate halt to strikes and what constitutes a withdrawal from Gaza. The other concerns political status, specifically whether and how a Palestinian state could be created in a way Hamas views as legitimate and binding.

With “obstacles” remaining, the next steps would likely depend on whether mediators or negotiators can find a pathway that satisfies both Hamas’s conditions and Israel’s stated red lines. Until that is resolved, Hamas’s statements appear to keep disarmament tied to a complex chain of demands rather than offering a near-term shift in capabilities.