(SeaPRwire) –
By: Julian Holbrooke
Netanyahu just told the world that Israel rejects the only viable peace framework currently on the table. His reasoning is simple but destructive. Israel will not withdraw from Gaza until Hamas is “genuinely disarmed.” He clarified this further, insisting the demand covers heavy weapons, light weapons, and every piece of military hardware. The language is uncompromising. The implications are catastrophic for any pathway toward a settled Gaza.
Hamas official Basem Naim responded directly on Sunday. He confirmed that Hamas remains committed to the Gaza roadmap agreed with mediators and Board of Peace representatives in Cairo ten days ago. Naim stated clearly that Hamas expects mediators and the United States to press Netanyahu and his government to adhere to that roadmap. Trump had previously signaled a breakthrough in the peace process, claiming Hamas agreed to lay down its weapons. Hamas controlled Gaza for nearly two decades before the October 7, 2023 attack triggered this war. Yet here we are, with the ceasefire from last October still fragile and the disarmament question entirely unresolved.
The contradiction is stark and will not go unnoticed in international capitals. Netanyahu is now publicly repudiating the 15-point proposal crafted by the Board of Peace. This is the same Board working alongside US and regional mediators. His position places him directly at odds with the Trump administration’s broader push for a Gaza settlement. The sequencing of disarmament before withdrawal is the precise point of fracture. The Board’s framework presumably envisioned a different arrangement. Israel has continued carrying out strikes in Gaza since the ceasefire took effect. That reality on the ground does not match the language of “adherence to a roadmap” that Naim is appealing for.
What happens next will define the region’s trajectory for the foreseeable future. Netanyahu also made his opposition to a Palestinian state explicit, rejecting both Gaza and the West Bank. He specifically referenced “Fatahstan” and “Hamastan” as scenarios he will not tolerate. On Iran, he claimed Tehran has refrained from striking Israel because of deterrence. He praised Trump as the greatest friend in the White House. But the partnership between Netanyahu and Washington is now showing stress fractures. The US wants to move forward with a broader plan. Israel holds the military veto. The geopolitical pendulum is shifting toward a deeper stalemate. The question is not whether the Board of Peace proposal can be revived. It is whether the current Israeli government has any genuine interest in a settlement that requires compromise.
Author bio: Julian Holbrooke is an overseas international relations analyst who frequently contributes to major European daily newspapers on Middle Eastern geopolitical affairs.