In the ceasefire negotiations that took place over the past months, before the Hamas movement reached an agreement with the “Peace Council” regarding the “road map” with fifteen items, the movement stressed the cessation of Israeli violations of the ceasefire that was reached in October 2025, and the necessity of dismantling the armed gangs that are active in the areas under Israel’s control inside the Gaza Strip.
During that period, Hamas understood the urgent need to implement these two provisions, and considered them important for achieving and establishing security calm, which would push its leaders in the “Al-Qassam Brigades,” the armed wing of the movement, as well as the brigades’ activists, to facilitate the process of confiscating weapons and moving to a new stage in the Gaza Strip.
Disapproving voices
During recent days, an Israeli special force carried out an operation considered the most dangerous and most important in terms of security, after it kidnapped a prominent Hamas security official after raiding his home and its surroundings, in an operation that is the first of its kind in the heart of the areas under the movement’s control, after the Israeli security services were relying on armed gangs to carry out attacks aimed at assassinating or kidnapping a security officer, or activists in the armed factions.
A field source from Hamas in the Gaza Strip told Asharq Al-Awsat that the attention-grabbing and dangerous operation carried out against the prominent security official, Moin Al-Arabid, prompted many within the movement to ask questions that many, especially in the movement’s active base, see as legitimate, about the feasibility of engaging in the arms control operation unless what is Israel’s responsibility is implemented.
The source explains that many were fundamentally opposed to any operation aimed at confining or handing over weapons, but there is an emphasis on adherence to the decision of the Political Bureau, but recent events have proven their vision that Israel is not concerned with the success of any agreement in Gaza, and therefore keeping weapons is a priority to confront any attempts similar to the recent operation.
The source pointed out that Israel's constant talk about security control indicates unequivocally that it seeks to transform Gaza into another version of the West Bank, carrying out operations there whenever it wants, in the same last way, and others. This is something that forces many armed activists to reject any step aimed at disarming them in one way or another under any name.
It seems that what gave these voices greater confidence was the operation carried out by an armed gang at dawn on Friday, in the Al-Gemmayzeh Street area in the town of Al-Qarara, northeast of Khan Yunis, to kidnap an activist in the Al-Quds Brigades, the armed wing of the Islamic Jihad movement, before the operation ended with his execution after he was tied up.
Political commitment
A political source in Hamas outside the Gaza Strip told Asharq Al-Awsat that the movement is committed to what was recently agreed upon in Egypt, and the full provisions of the “road map,” but Israel has not committed to anything. Therefore, the process of restricting weapons is fundamentally linked to implementing important provisions, including ensuring the cessation of Israeli violations and ensuring the personal security of activists in the movement and other Palestinian factions, which is linked to dismantling those armed gangs and disarming them.
The source adds that without these conditions, there will essentially be no arms control process, along with some other provisions, including what guarantees the establishment of a political path related to self-determination for the Palestinians.
The source indicates that neither Israel, nor the United States, nor even the “Peace Council” are showing any positive and real signs towards achieving these demands, or providing their obligations and guarantees, and therefore all matters are still in a state of stagnation, awaiting the outcome of the Israeli Knesset elections at the end of next October.
Israeli plans
It seems that Israel is trying to circumvent the implementation of the provisions of the “Road Map,” by thinking about applying the Lebanon model in the Gaza Strip, by identifying “experimental areas” outside the “yellow line” into which international stability forces will be inserted to dismantle the armed infrastructure of the factions and establish an alternative governance system, while the Israeli forces will remain in areas under their security control, monitor those areas, and carry out attacks if there is a security necessity. As reported by the Hebrew newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth on Friday.
Meanwhile, the Hebrew newspaper “Haaretz” revealed disagreements between the American administration and the Israeli government, and that there is a gap in seeing the reality on the ground, noting that the Israeli security services refuse to cooperate with the “Peace Council,” and also refuse the entry of the International Stabilization Force into the Strip, and that doubts are growing about the possibility of making real progress regarding the ceasefire before the Knesset elections.
In a tweet on the X platform, the “Peace Council” denied what the Hebrew newspaper reported about the existence of American efforts within the Council to reduce the role of Aryeh Lightstone, who was chosen by the White House to implement US President Donald Trump’s twenty-point plan, under the pretext that he was not firm with Israel.
According to the same report, during the recent meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and security officials, including the head of the General Security Service (Shin Bet), David Zinni, with the American envoy Jared Kushner, the High Representative of Gaza in the Peace Council, Nikolai Mladenov, and prominent member of the Council, Tony Blair, intelligence information was provided that confirms Israeli fears that Hamas does not intend to disarm.
The positions of the “Peace Council”
In another tweet posted on his account on the “X” platform, the “Peace Council” said that “Hamas” surrendered to the Council’s demands, and that all this destruction was in vain, and that large parts of the supporters of Palestine and the Western left bet on a losing horse, and adopted a corrupt resistance that the movement itself has now nullified, adding: “In the next decade, Gaza must become the pride of the Palestinian people, and the crown jewel of the Palestinian national identity. Gaza must become a model of effective Palestinian self-government, strengthening confidence between allies and Israel that Palestinian aspirations focus on freedom and prosperity, not on the destruction of Israel. To achieve this, Gaza must be reimagined so that it is no longer supported by an NGO complex or refugee framework. Gaza will need a deep improvement in schools, mosques, media, and public language, to cultivate and produce builders and creators.”
In response to that tweet, Hazem Qassem, spokesman for the Hamas movement, said in a press statement that what the Council published had nothing to do with the truth, and contained unfair positions against the Palestinian people and their resistance, and did not reflect in a balanced manner the reality of the current positions and developments, stressing the importance of the Council maintaining a balanced and objective discourse, and avoiding publishing materials that would offend any Palestinian party, or adopt the narratives of the occupation. He called on the Council and Mladenov to focus their efforts on the Council’s basic tasks, most notably establishing the ceasefire, working to stop violations, ensuring the flow of humanitarian aid, and following up on the implementation of what was agreed upon in a way that contributes to achieving stability.
With the start of the countdown to September 30th, the date set for the final US withdrawal from Iraq, the tripartite committee formed by the Shiite “coordinating framework” has not achieved a tangible breakthrough, so far, in terms of resolving the issue of weapons for the factions that refuse to hand over their equipment to the Iraqi government by the day of the US withdrawal. The government of Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi calls September 30 “Sovereignty Day,” a date that was initially believed to mean the completion of the Americans’ withdrawal with the handing over of the factions’ weapons to government forces. However, the negotiations taking place between the “coordination framework” and the armed forces seem to have reached a dead end.
According to the latest position of the armed factions, expressed by the Al-Nujaba movement, as well as the statements made by former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the leader of the Badr Organization, Hadi al-Amiri, there is no final or settled date for the process of handing over, inventorying, removing or freezing weapons located outside the framework of the state. Armed forces have previously announced their refusal to hand over their stocks, led by the Hezbollah Brigades and Al-Nujaba, stressing that they will not adhere to any dates for handing over weapons, as it is an ideological weapon and not limited to national borders.
The head of the political council of the Al-Nujaba movement, Ali Al-Asadi, announced that the movement adhered to its right not to infringe on what he called the “sanctity” of the resistance’s weapons in the face of regional dangers and threats, he said. Al-Asadi explained, in his blog post on the “X” platform, on Friday, that he completed a visit to the poles of the political process in the “coordination framework,” assuring them of the movement’s position regarding the importance of “preserving the existence of the (Popular) Mobilization Forces as a national body that cannot be touched,” as well as the necessity of preserving the “resistance” and “the sanctity of its weapons” in light of the “realistic and dangerous dangers and threats” that the country and the region are witnessing. Al-Asadi also stressed Al-Nujaba’s approach of not participating in the political process, indicating that “this approach is what keeps us with our people, living what they live, bearing their concerns, and striving to achieve their demands.” He stressed that “this trust remains our responsibility until we achieve comprehensive change that guarantees sovereignty, security and prosperity, free our economy from American hegemony” and stabilize the internal situation.
A flood of exaggeration
For its part, the Iraqi government believes, through the spokesman for the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Sabah al-Numan, that “there is no force in the world or regional circumstances capable of breaking a state whose people rally around its institutions with all its components and sects.” Al-Numan warned, in a briefing, of what he called “a flood of intimidation led by platforms funded with suspicious capital to market fear and exploit the emotions of Iraqis, coinciding with the approaching deadline of September 30.” Al-Numan added, “The military and security establishment, which stood in the darkest and harshest circumstances, and gave the most precious blood to protect this land, is fully aware of the magnitude of the challenges, and is working in the field around the clock, away from the clamor of bidding,” indicating that “the next stage requires wisdom, steadfastness, and solidarity.”
Regarding the issue of restricting weapons and what the armed factions want according to the announced dates for their delivery, the military and strategic expert, Mukhled Hazem, told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The political blocs that often make unbalanced statements do not give the true vision of what they are thinking in the dark rooms, as everyone knows that the options for them are limited, and these gains, spoils, prestige, and power may cause them to lose at any moment.” He continued, explaining that “everyone agrees that the issue of arms control must end, because the issue is no longer related to internal will only, but rather to external will, which is a trade-off between remaining in power or going into the unknown.”
Hazem added, “Some politicians come out with words in front of their audience for the purpose of cover only, while trying to provide some kind of favoritism to these factions, while it is a reality that was imposed not on Iraq (only) but also on Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, that weapons cannot remain outside the scope of the state, and the presence of armed groups cannot be considered to control the decision on war and peace.” He continued, "Everyone now no longer has many options in this regard (...) A decision has been decided on the issue of restricting weapons in a certain and final manner."
Between Al-Maliki and Al-Amiri
In addition, the tripartite committee formed by the “coordination framework” and including former prime ministers Muhammad Shiaa al-Sudani, Nouri al-Maliki, and the leader of the Badr Organization, Hadi al-Amiri, continues to conduct negotiations with the armed factions that refuse to hand over their weapons. However, recent statements made by both Al-Maliki and Al-Amiri raised questions among the political forces and the Iraqi street regarding the nature of the agreed-upon dates for restricting weapons to the state. Al-Maliki stressed, in his statements, that “there is no disarmament of the factions,” but rather a process of organizing it, without specifying a time frame for doing so, which, according to some sources, means transferring the process until after the American withdrawal. As for Al-Amiri, he went further when he confirmed, in a speech, the survival of the armed factions, revealing that they were the ones who protected the political system after confronting what he called “the October sedition,” in reference to the mass uprising that occurred in 2019 and which was suppressed with iron and fire.
In this context, the academic and political activist, Dr. Fares Haram, told Asharq Al-Awsat, “The first thing that is interesting about Al-Amiri’s statement is that it was consistent with the accusations made by a group of Western reports during the days of the October Movement that the armed factions in Iraq are responsible for killing the demonstrators. Some reports at the time mentioned by name some of the leaders involved in the liquidations, assassinations, and the unprovoked attack that was carried out on the youth of Tishreen in that uprising. Haram adds, “Such harmony comes to the mind of the Public Prosecutor in Iraq, and here I wonder: Where is the role of the Public Prosecutor in Iraq in monitoring such situations since 2003? Until now, the Public Prosecution Authority has not done its job in following up on operations that require judicial intervention. He continued, "An investigation should have been opened into these statements (about the role of the factions in suppressing the October Movement) based on the connection to the reports that the Iraqi government and the armed factions had denied at the time, and therefore we are facing a connection that must be kept in mind." He explained that “it must be understood from Al-Amiri what he intended in his statement, which means that the factions are responsible” for suppressing the protests, pointing out that this is also related to what was previously announced by the Prime Minister, at the time, Adel Abdul Mahdi, who said that whoever carried out those killings against the demonstrators was a “third party.” He added: “Unfortunately, we in Iraq have become accustomed to everything going uninvestigated as part of the process of impunity.”
