Hamas Declares End of War, Not End of Resistance, as Disarmament Remains Unresolved

The ceasefire deal that ended the two-year war in the Gaza Strip, though celebrated for securing the release of hostages and an immediate cessation of hostilities, has immediately highlighted a profound and unresolved conflict at the heart of the peace plan: the future of Palestinian armed resistance. While Hamas has agreed to abandon its political governance of Gaza, the group has issued strong statements vowing to remain “faithful to our cause” and committed to “national rights until freedom, independence, and self-determination are achieved.” This suggests that the end of the war does not automatically signal the end of the resistance as envisioned by Israel and the United States.
The current agreement, which is only Phase One of the broader U.S.-brokered peace plan, intentionally defers the thorniest “Day After” issues, including the disarmament of Hamas and the final governance structure of the enclave, to subsequent negotiations. This strategic delay has brought a halt to the immense suffering but leaves the fundamental long-term security questions hanging precariously over the fragile peace.
The Resistance Stance: Disarmament as a Red Line
The core of the dispute rests on the future of Hamas’s military wing. The U.S.-brokered peace plan calls for the complete demilitarization and disarmament of Hamas. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long insisted that the total elimination of Hamas’s military capability is a precondition for a full Israeli withdrawal and the long-term cessation of hostilities.
◦ Hamas’s Public Position: Despite agreeing to the first phase of the peace plan, which implicitly accepts the framework for disarmament in a future phase, Hamas hardliners have made their stance unequivocally clear. Senior Hamas officials have repeatedly told Arab and international mediators that giving up their weapons is a “red line” and an unacceptable surrender. “No Palestinian accepts disarming,” one official stated, emphasizing that Palestinians remain in need of weapons and resistance to achieve their national goals.
◦ A “Weapon of Last Resort”: For Hamas, surrendering its arms means forfeiting its most powerful—and arguably its only—tool of political leverage. While the group has agreed to relinquish its governing role in Gaza to a yet-to-be-formed committee of Palestinian technocrats, it views its armed wing as essential for defending national rights and ensuring Israel cannot unilaterally resume military operations once the hostages are released. Hamas successfully secured guarantees from the U.S., Qatar, and Turkey that the agreement signals a permanent end to the war, a key demand that it believes was achieved through the strength of its resistance.
The Disarmament Deadlock in Phase Two
The first phase agreement, focused on the hostage-prisoner exchange and the initial Israeli pullback, does not include any mechanism, timeline, or clear commitment for disarmament. Mediators deliberately pushed this critical issue into the second phase of the talks, recognizing that forcing the issue now would have torpedoed the deal.
◦ The Trump Plan’s Provision: The peace plan states that Hamas members “who commit to peaceful coexistence and to decommission their weapons will be given amnesty,” and those who wish to leave Gaza would be provided “safe passage.” However, without a concrete, verifiable plan for dismantling Hamas’s rockets, tunnel networks, and armed brigades, the risk remains, as experts warn, that the group could regroup and launch future attacks.
◦ The Reconstruction Dilemma: The disarmament issue is tied directly to the massive reconstruction effort required for the devastated Gaza Strip. Arab and international governments are highly unlikely to commit the estimated $50 billion needed for rebuilding if they believe Hamas could retake power or resume attacks, leading to another cycle of destruction. The pressure to disarm will therefore shift from a purely military one to an economic and political imperative during the subsequent negotiations.
The Future of the Palestinian Project
Hamas’s statement that its “sacrifices will not be in vain” and its vow to achieve “freedom, independence, and self-determination” underscore a political victory, despite the military devastation it endured. The deal:
◦ Secured a Ceasefire: It achieved a halt to the war and a partial Israeli withdrawal.
◦ Forced a Prisoner Release: It compelled Israel to release nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, including 250 serving life sentences, a major political accomplishment for the resistance movement.
Hamas has thus positioned itself not as a defeated military force, but as the political entity that successfully forced concessions from Israel and ended the war. The future of the Palestinian resistance is now less about controlling Gaza’s administration and more about maintaining its military capability as a veto power over future political and security arrangements. The success of the “everlasting peace” envisioned by President Trump depends entirely on the willingness of Hamas to make the ultimate concession—giving up the very arms it credits with achieving the ceasefire.