Hamas declares It Will Not Govern post-War Gaza, Shaping the Future of the Strip
The future of Gaza hangs in the balance as Hamas, the militant group controlling the territory, has publicly stated it will not participate in any post-war governance. This announcement, delivered by a source close to Hamas’ negotiating committee to the Associated French Press (AFP) on October 12, 2025, arrives as international leaders prepare for a crucial peace summit in Egypt aimed at solidifying the recent ceasefire and charting a path forward. This growth significantly alters the landscape of potential solutions and raises critical questions about the stability and long-term viability of a rebuilt Gaza.
This declaration comes amidst ongoing discussions surrounding the implementation of a 20-point peace plan proposed by former US President Donald Trump. A central tenet of this plan – and a major sticking point – is the complete disarmament of Hamas and its exclusion from any role in governing the Gaza Strip. Understanding Hamas’ position, and the complexities within the institution itself, is crucial to deciphering the path ahead.
A Shift in Power Dynamics: why Hamas is Stepping Back
Hamas’ decision to forgo governance isn’t necessarily a sign of weakness, but rather a calculated strategic move. The source emphasized that while Hamas relinquishes direct control, it remains “a fundamental part of the Palestinian fabric.” This suggests a desire to maintain influence through other channels, perhaps focusing on social programs, security, or acting as a powerful political force outside of formal governance.
Historically, Hamas’ leadership has been internally divided on key issues, notably regarding the management of Gaza.This internal debate reflects the diverse perspectives within the organization, ranging from pragmatic political actors to hardline ideologues. though,a unified stance appears to exist regarding disarmament – a long-held “red line” for the group.
“Hamas agrees to a long-term truce, and for its weapons not to be used at all during this period, except in the event of an Israeli attack on Gaza,” the source revealed. This conditional acceptance of a ceasefire, coupled with the insistence on retaining defensive capabilities, highlights Hamas’ core concern: ensuring its survival and the protection of Gazan civilians against perceived aggression. Another Hamas official, speaking anonymously, reiterated that complete disarmament remains “out of the question.”
The Trump plan: A Framework for Reconstruction and Demilitarization
The Trump plan envisions a “deradicalized terror-free zone” in Gaza, free from threats to neighboring countries. Its first clause explicitly excludes Hamas from future governance and demands the destruction of its military infrastructure and weapons. This aspiring goal faces significant hurdles, given Hamas’ deeply entrenched presence and the complex security dynamics of the region.
To facilitate a transition, the plan proposes a temporary technocratic and apolitical Palestinian committee to manage essential public services. Negotiations are underway, mediated by Egypt, to finalize the composition of this committee. According to the Hamas source, “the names are almost ready,” with 40 candidates submitted by Hamas and other factions. Crucially, the source affirmed that “none of them belong to Hamas,” demonstrating a willingness to comply with the stipulations of the plan regarding governance.
Implications for Gaza’s Future: Challenges and Opportunities
Hamas’ withdrawal from governance presents both challenges and opportunities.
Challenges:
* power Vacuum: The absence of a clear governing authority could lead to instability and a resurgence of violence.
* Implementation of the Trump Plan: Successfully dismantling Hamas’ military infrastructure and preventing its re-emergence will be a monumental task.
* Economic Reconstruction: Gaza’s economy has been devastated by years of conflict. Rebuilding infrastructure and creating enduring livelihoods will require substantial international investment and a stable political habitat.
* Internal Palestinian Divisions: Reconciling the differing agendas of Hamas, Fatah, and other palestinian factions remains a significant obstacle to lasting peace.
Opportunities:
* A Chance for Civilian Leadership: A technocratic committee could provide a neutral platform for rebuilding Gaza and improving the lives of its residents.
* International Aid and Investment: The prospect of a demilitarized and stable Gaza could attract significant international aid and investment.
* Long-Term Peace: A triumphant transition could pave the way for a lasting peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
Recent data from the united Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) https://www.unrwa.org/ (October 2025 report) indicates that over 70% of Gaza’s population relies on humanitarian assistance, underscor
