Hamas Will Not Disarm Until Israel Withdraws. Israel Will Not Withdraw Until Hamas Disarms. The Ceasefire Is Expiring.
What happened
Negotiations between Hamas and the Board of Peace (Trump's Gaza governance body) reached a public deadlock on May 4 over disarmament sequencing. Hamas refuses to disarm before Israel withdraws to the 'yellow line' and guarantees reconstruction. Israel refuses to withdraw before Hamas begins handing over weapons. The Board of Peace's roadmap, presented by High Representative Nikolay Mladenov, requires complete Hamas disarmament within 281 days across five stages as a precondition for humanitarian aid and reconstruction. A joint Palestinian factions document linking disarmament to statehood guarantees was formally rejected by both the US and Israel. Hamas has simultaneously held internal elections, choosing hardline leaders on both the Gaza and diaspora tracks.
The October ceasefire agreement deferred the sequencing question that makes or breaks the deal: who moves first, Hamas on weapons or Israel on withdrawal. Seven months later, no one has moved, and Israel is threatening to resume the war it cannot currently afford to fight.
Prediction Markets
Prices as of 2026-05-04 — the analysis was written against these odds
The Hidden Bet
Hamas's refusal to disarm reflects strategic calculation rather than internal fragmentation
Hamas just held internal elections and chose the same leaders who signed the October deal. But the Qassam Brigades, Hamas's military wing, have called disarmament 'extremely dangerous' in language that diverges from the political bureau. The military and political wings may not be unified on what they would accept
Israel's war resumption threats are credible deterrence
Former Israeli military operations chief Israel Ziv has said the IDF is 'deeply exhausted,' with reservists serving 80 days per year. Israel controls 50% of Gaza territorially but has not achieved its stated goal of eliminating Hamas governance. A renewed offensive would require reservist mobilization that is politically and physically costly while the Lebanon front remains unresolved
The ceasefire architecture of the October deal was a genuine peace framework
The deal deliberately omitted sequencing: it said disarmament would happen and withdrawal would happen, without specifying which came first. Both sides agreed to an ambiguity they each interpret in their own favor. The Board of Peace is now trying to force a resolution to a question the original negotiators avoided
The Real Disagreement
The core fork is whether disarmament is a precondition for a political process or the product of one. The US and Israel say Hamas must disarm first, then governance and reconstruction follow. Hamas and the Palestinian factions say they will discuss disarmament only after a guaranteed political horizon: statehood, sovereignty, end of occupation. These are not negotiating positions. They are incompatible theories of what security means. For Israel, security requires the elimination of Hamas as an armed force before anything else happens. For Hamas, surrendering weapons without a state guarantee is surrender, period. The Polymarket odds say there is only an 11% chance of Phase II ceasefire by June 30. That market is pricing in what the diplomatic language won't say: this deal is effectively dead in its current form.
What No One Is Saying
Hamas won the October deal by surviving. It negotiated a ceasefire after losing most of its senior leadership, most of its tunnels, and 72,000 dead. Agreeing to disarm now, seven months later, while still governing Gaza and with its military wing intact, would be to hand Israel the victory it failed to achieve militarily. No armed organization in history has disarmed in exchange for a promise it would receive political rights. The US and Israel are asking Hamas to do something that has never happened.
Who Pays
2.4 million Gazans
Ongoing; the ceasefire has not produced the aid flows it promised
The Board of Peace roadmap conditions reconstruction, humanitarian aid, and crossing openings on Hamas disarmament. If the deadlock holds, reconstruction does not begin. 828 Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire; starvation and disease continue
Netanyahu
October 2026 Israeli elections are the forcing function
His corruption trial continues. His political survival depends on appearing strong on Hamas. If he resumes the war without achieving disarmament, he faces the same outcome as October 2025. If he does not, the right flank of his coalition withdraws support before October elections
Trump's Middle East legacy
Any Israeli military action before November 2026 would land in the middle of US midterm election season
The Board of Peace is branded as Trump's 20-point plan. A ceasefire collapse would be the most visible foreign policy failure of his second term, occurring simultaneously with the Iran nuclear standoff
Scenarios
Managed stagnation
Neither side moves. Hamas doesn't disarm, Israel doesn't withdraw. The ceasefire nominally holds but aid is restricted and occupation expands. The Board of Peace issues periodic statements of 'substantial progress.' This continues through October's Israeli elections.
Signal No Israeli security cabinet vote on resuming hostilities in the next 30 days
Limited Israeli action
Israel conducts targeted strikes against Hamas military infrastructure in Gaza, citing ceasefire violations, without declaring a full offensive. Hamas responds with rocket fire. The cycle restarts at lower intensity than 2023-2025.
Signal IDF strikes in eastern Gaza within 48 hours; Hamas fires back without declaring the ceasefire void
Statehood framework unlocks deal
A new mediator (possibly Erdogan or the Saudi foreign minister) proposes an interim framework: a Palestinian Authority-supervised governance transition in Gaza in exchange for phased disarmament with international monitoring. Hamas accepts because it preserves political legitimacy.
Signal Saudi Arabia formally endorses a Palestinian governance transition mechanism that does not name Hamas as the interlocutor
What Would Change This
If Israel formally announced a renewed military offensive rather than just threatening one, the calculus changes: every Arab mediator would pressure Hamas to accept any terms to avoid another 72,000-person death toll. The threats are currently too routine to compel that pressure.