Hamas has indicated that it reacted positively to a recent ceasefire proposal relayed by U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff, marking a significant shift from their earlier agreement.
Basem Naim, a prominent official within Hamas, remarked on Saturday to Al Jazeera that while the group appreciates the latest proposal, it lacks sufficient guarantees to conclude the ongoing war.
The ongoing conflict has resulted in the deaths of over 54,000 Palestinians since October 2023, compounded by an extensive aid blockade implemented by Israel since March.
This blockade has led to severe shortages, creating a humanitarian crisis and famine-like conditions in Gaza, which is home to approximately 2.3 million residents, many of whom have been displaced due to weeks of intense bombardment.
Facing mounting international pressure, Israel has allowed a minimal influx of humanitarian aid into Gaza; however, organizations have characterized this relief as merely a “drop in an ocean.”
In the context of the ceasefire proposal, Hamas has placed emphasis on several key provisions deemed essential for their acceptance.
First, they are advocating for a pathway towards a permanent ceasefire, as opposed to a temporary agreement that could be unilaterally terminated by the Israeli government, as was the case in March.
Additionally, Hamas is demanding the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Gaza Strip, alongside a comprehensive resumption of aid to the besieged population.
A critical point of contention lies in Witkoff’s proposal, which outlines a 60-day pause in hostilities, during which both Hamas and Israel would determine the possibility of extending the ceasefire.
Hamas has raised concerns regarding this approach, recalling the previous instance in which Israel unilaterally reinstated its bombing campaign and halted aid following a similar pause.
To mitigate against a repeat of such events, Hamas has sought to negotiate a staggered release of hostages during the proposed ceasefire period.
Witkoff’s proposal included a timeline demanding the release of captives within one week of initiating the 60-day pause, which Hamas deems too risky, believing that Israel might recommence its military operations post-release.
Also noteworthy is Hamas’s reintroduction of a provision from a previous agreement from May 25, suggesting that governance of Gaza be handed over to an “independent technocratic committee.”
The U.S. response to Hamas’s additions has been pointedly critical.
Witkoff labeled Hamas’s response as “totally unacceptable,” indicating that the group’s demands were counter-productive to peace efforts.
He emphasized that Hamas should embrace the framework proposal provided by the U.S. as a foundation for proximity talks, which they could initiate imminently.
This approach, Witkoff stated, is vital to securing a 60-day ceasefire deal in the coming days, wherein half of the hostages and deceased could return to their families.
U.S. President Donald Trump had earlier indicated that both parties were nearing a resolution.
Israel’s stance aligns closely with the U.S., supporting the proposed 60-day ceasefire.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Israel’s backing of the new proposal, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated his disapproval of Hamas’s response, echoing Witkoff’s sentiment that the group’s negotiations only hinder progress.
Netanyahu emphasized Israel’s commitment to continuing military actions aimed at the return of Israeli hostages and the neutralization of Hamas.
Given the consensus between the U.S. and Israel on the terms of the ceasefire, the question arises: why is Hamas hesitant to fully accept the proposal?
This skepticism stems from a history of Israel breaking ceasefire agreements.
As highlighted by Tamer Qarmout, an associate professor at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, negotiations are perceived to lack genuine good faith from the Israeli side, indicating a fixation on forcing Hamas’s capitulation rather than negotiating meaningfully.
Hamas’s involvement in the talks appears to be driven by an effort to alleviate the consequences of war while seeking a dignified resolution rather than complete surrender.
As the situation continues to evolve, Israeli military operations persist unabated.
On Sunday, for instance, forces opened fire on Palestinians gathered at aid distribution sites operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a U.S.-backed organization, resulting in the deaths of at least 31 individuals in Rafah and additional casualties near the Netzarim Corridor.
image source from：https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2025/6/1/why-hamas-is-seeking-to-change-the-us-proposed-gaza-ceasefire-deal
