On October 5, 2025, a pivotal moment unfolded in the long-running Gaza conflict, as Hamas delivered its much-anticipated response to the Trump administration’s 20-point peace plan. The proposal, designed to halt two years of devastating war, has sparked a wave of international reaction and cautious optimism, but also exposed the deep fissures and complexities underlying any potential resolution.
According to AhlulBayt News Agency, senior Hamas official Mousa Abu Marzouk made the group’s stance clear: while Hamas agrees with the general framework of the plan, the details still require substantial negotiation. "This plan cannot be executed without negotiation," Abu Marzouk told Al Jazeera, underscoring that the group’s primary concern is "stopping the war and the slaughter." He added, "We are prepared to negotiate on all issues concerning the movement and its weapons." However, he dismissed the plan’s demand for a 72-hour prisoner and body handover as "theoretical and unrealistic under current conditions."
Hamas’s response, as reported by The Express Tribune, included a readiness to release hostages and begin negotiations for a lasting peace arrangement, provided Israel halts military operations and allows talks to proceed. The group also announced a willingness to transfer Gaza’s administration to an independent technocratic committee under the Palestinian Authority, aligning with a previous Cairo agreement from late 2023. "We have reached a national agreement to hand over the administration of Gaza to independent technocrats, and the authority for this administration will be the Palestinian Authority," Abu Marzouk explained, making it clear that Gaza’s future governance would not be dictated unilaterally by Hamas.
On the contentious issue of disarmament, Abu Marzouk made a significant declaration: "We will hand over the weapons to the future Palestinian state. Whoever will govern Gaza will hold the weapons." This statement reflects Hamas’s insistence that arms should remain under Palestinian control, not be surrendered to foreign powers. Another senior Hamas figure, Osama Hamdan, told Al-Araby that "we will not accept, under any circumstances, any party outside Palestine assuming the administration of Gaza," and stressed that any prisoner exchange process would require more than 72 hours and a mutual understanding between the parties.
The international response to Hamas’s position has been swift and largely positive. World leaders, including former President Trump, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, hailed Hamas’s willingness to engage as a breakthrough. Trump, in a statement on Truth Social, said, "Based on the statement released by Hamas, I believe they are ready for a lasting peace. Israel must immediately halt the bombing of Gaza so we can safely and swiftly extract the prisoners." Macron called for the plan’s immediate implementation, while Erdogan described Hamas’s reply as "a constructive and vital step towards a lasting peace."
Foreign ministers from eight Muslim countries—Jordan, the UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkiye, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Egypt—also welcomed Hamas’s steps. In a joint statement, they praised Trump’s commitment to peace and called the developments "a real opportunity" for a ceasefire and to address Gaza’s dire humanitarian crisis. The ministers supported Hamas’s move to hand over Gaza’s administration to a transitional Palestinian committee of independent technocrats and urged immediate negotiations to flesh out the plan’s implementation. The joint statement reiterated their commitment to ending hostilities, ensuring unimpeded humanitarian aid, and preventing the displacement of Palestinians.
The Trump plan itself, presented during meetings at the UN General Assembly, calls for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages within 72 hours, a phased Israeli withdrawal, and the creation of an International Stabilization Force to monitor the truce. It envisions a "New Gaza" reconstruction program, funded by international donors, but notably excludes Hamas from any future governing role. The plan promises gradual movement toward Palestinian self-governance and a two-state solution.
Despite the outward momentum, significant skepticism remains. Hamas’s official response, while positive in tone, retains critical reservations—especially regarding the rapid release of prisoners and the exclusion of foreign administration in Gaza. The group’s insistence on maintaining weapons under Palestinian authority reflects a deep-seated distrust of both the US and Israel, rooted in past experiences where negotiations gave way to renewed violence or broken promises. As AhlulBayt News Agency noted, "the resistance is unwilling to compromise on the fundamental principles and interests of the Palestinian people, particularly the right to armed resistance."
On the Israeli side, the reaction has been mixed. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly supported the Trump plan, claiming it met all of Israel’s war objectives. Yet, according to Axios, Netanyahu was surprised by Trump’s positive response to Hamas and reportedly sought to coordinate with the Americans to "ensure the perception that Hamas responded positively to the deal does not take hold." Within Israel’s hardline cabinet, ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have threatened to leave the coalition if Netanyahu agrees to a deal with Hamas, putting additional pressure on the prime minister and casting doubt on Israel’s willingness to follow through.
Meanwhile, the humanitarian situation in Gaza remains dire. Aid deliveries are urgently needed, and the ongoing violence has left the population devastated. International mediators, particularly from Egypt and Qatar, are expected to facilitate indirect talks in the coming days to hammer out the practical steps for a ceasefire and prisoner exchange. The global community, from the UN Secretary-General António Guterres to the Qatari and Egyptian foreign ministries, has called for all parties to seize this opportunity to end the war and begin reconstruction.
Yet, as some regional diplomats have pointed out, the US version of the plan differs from earlier drafts discussed among Arab and Islamic states. Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told parliament that "changes were made to the draft without consultation," and stressed that any agreement must align with principles previously agreed upon by Muslim countries. There is a determined push among these states to ensure unrestricted humanitarian access, no displacement, and the return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza.
In a related episode, the humanitarian Sumud aid flotilla, including Pakistani senator Mushtaq Ahmad, was intercepted by Israeli forces while attempting to break the blockade on Gaza. Pakistan’s Foreign Office confirmed Ahmad’s safety and is working through diplomatic channels for his repatriation, highlighting the continued risks and complexities facing international efforts to assist Gazans.
As the Trump administration reviews Hamas’s response, the world waits to see if the US will accept the proposed amendments or stick to its original demands. The outcome will determine whether this fragile window for peace opens wider or slams shut. For now, Hamas’s response, the international chorus of support, and the ongoing diplomatic wrangling all point to a moment of potential transformation—if, and only if, the parties can move beyond rhetoric to genuine compromise and action.
With the eyes of the world on Gaza, the next steps taken by Washington, Tel Aviv, and the Palestinian leadership will decide whether this historic opportunity leads to peace or yet another chapter of conflict.