Trump‑Chaired Board Gives Hamas a Deadline to Accept Demilitarization to Unlock Gaza Reconstruction

Overview

A 20‑page framework circulated among cease‑fire mediators in Cairo this spring would trade Hamas’s weapons, rockets and tunnel network for a scheduled withdrawal of Israeli forces and a multibillion‑dollar reconstruction effort. According to reporting by The New York Times and regional outlets, the international body behind that plan — the Trump‑chaired Board of Peace — has given Hamas until the end of the week to accept the proposal.

What the board proposes

Diplomats and news accounts say the unpublished Board text requires phased, verifiable demilitarization by Hamas and other armed factions. Under the reported outline:

• An initial roughly 90‑day period would see the surrender of heavy arms (rockets, launchers) and the delivery of detailed maps of tunnel systems and weapons depots.
• Subsequent phases would retrieve remaining light weapons, potentially using an internationally funded buy‑back program.
• Israel would withdraw forces progressively from larger areas of Gaza as independent monitors confirm dismantling of military infrastructure.
• Restrictions on essential imports — food, fuel and construction materials — would be eased in step with security milestones.
• Hamas members who renounce armed activity could be offered amnesty or, in some versions, safe passage to third countries.

The Board of Peace, created under former President Donald Trump’s 20‑point Gaza plan and later endorsed by the U.N. Security Council, has transitional authority over the cease‑fire, reconstruction funding and an International Stabilization Force. Palestinians are not represented on the panel, which has prompted criticism that the structure centralizes power among a small group of governments closely aligned with Washington.

Reactions from Hamas and supporters

Hamas has publicly rejected the disarmament framing. The Izz ad‑Din al‑Qassam Brigades called the demands “extremely dangerous” and “an overt attempt to continue the genocide,” saying the movement would not discuss disarmament until Israel implements the first phase of the cease‑fire, including larger troop withdrawals and an end to daily violations.

Some senior Hamas voices, however, have signaled they could accept the principle of demilitarization if it is tied to ironclad guarantees of a full Israeli withdrawal and protection against renewed attacks. That conditional openness has been relayed in private mediator discussions between Hamas envoys and officials from Egypt, Qatar and Turkey.

Stakes for Gaza’s civilians

More than two million Gazans remain in limbo after the October 7, 2023 assault by Hamas and Israel’s ensuing campaign. Palestinian health authorities say the toll on civilians and infrastructure has been catastrophic. Even after the cease‑fire of October 10, 2025, large parts of Gaza lie in ruins, hundreds of thousands live in temporary shelters, and core post‑war institutions — including the International Stabilization Force and a technocratic Palestinian civil authority — have not been fully established.

For many residents, acceptance of the Board’s terms could mean access to durable housing, electricity and clean water. Board officials and U.S. diplomats have said reconstruction funding from Gulf and Western donors is explicitly conditioned on verified demilitarization.

Diplomatic context and implications

U.S. officials have linked Gaza’s future directly to Hamas’s disarmament. At a March U.N. Security Council session U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz said, ``The future of Gaza … is entirely dependent now on Hamas decommissioning its weapons.'' Nickolay Mladenov, director of the Board of Peace, described the proposal as a comprehensive framework requiring a single clear choice: full decommissioning by Hamas and every armed group.

The reported "end of the week" deadline applies to accepting the framework rather than immediate physical disarmament. Mediators had given Hamas an informal short window after Eid to respond; Arabic media say that has hardened into an ultimatum.

A Hamas agreement could unlock international funding, accelerate Israeli withdrawals and transfer security responsibilities to new Palestinian and multinational structures. A rejection or continued delay, by contrast, could freeze reconstruction, deepen Gaza’s isolation and raise the prospect of renewed large‑scale Israeli military operations.

Broader regional tensions — including U.S. and Israeli confrontations with Iran and its allied groups — add uncertainty. Hamas officials have said they are monitoring that wider conflict before taking irreversible steps.

What comes next

Diplomatic shuttles continue in Cairo as mediators try to bridge remaining gaps. It is unclear whether the Board or Israel would revise the timeline or impose further measures if Hamas refuses to sign. The coming days will test whether the Trump‑led architecture for Gaza can translate an international framework into enforceable, locally accepted arrangements — and whether ordinary Gazans will see tangible relief as a result.