عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Arab World

Written Guarantees, Disputes Over Prisoners Mark Final Hours of Gaza Deal

Senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya gestures during a meeting ahead of the Gaza ceasefire announcement in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh on Wednesday (Cairo News TV)
Senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya gestures during a meeting ahead of the Gaza ceasefire announcement in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh on Wednesday (Cairo News TV)
TT
TT

Written Guarantees, Disputes Over Prisoners Mark Final Hours of Gaza Deal

Senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya gestures during a meeting ahead of the Gaza ceasefire announcement in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh on Wednesday (Cairo News TV)
Senior Hamas official Khalil al-Hayya gestures during a meeting ahead of the Gaza ceasefire announcement in Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheikh on Wednesday (Cairo News TV)

Sources from Hamas and other Palestinian factions revealed details of the final hours of negotiations over a Gaza ceasefire agreement hosted in the Egyptian resort city of Sharm el-Sheikh.

US President Donald Trump announced on his Truth Social platform that Israel and Hamas had signed the first phase of what he called a “Peace Plan,” an agreement he proposed that includes the release of all Israeli hostages.

“I am very proud to announce that Israel and Hamas have both signed off on the first Phase of our Peace Plan,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

“This means that ALL of the Hostages will be released very soon, and Israel will withdraw their Troops to an agreed upon line as the first steps toward a Strong, Durable, and Everlasting Peace,” he added.

According to sources who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat, the talks in Sharm el-Sheikh were held “in two separate rooms” for the Israeli and Palestinian delegations, with mediators shuttling between them. The atmosphere was described as “positive,” at least from the Palestinian side.

A Hamas source said that “the Israeli delegation held several phone consultations with senior officials, particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu,” before responding to proposals.

US and Regional Guarantees

Palestinian faction representatives said they received “clear guarantees” from Trump and the US delegation - reinforced by mediators, especially Türkiye - that Washington would ensure Israel does not resume military operations. The source added that the Palestinian side “obtained a written guarantee” to that effect.

Partial Withdrawal

The Palestinian delegation, the sources said, insisted on a full withdrawal of Israeli ground forces from densely populated areas in Gaza.

The sources added that “there was a notable shift” in Israel’s withdrawal plan, particularly from parts of Khan Younis and Rafah in the south, a move seen as a prelude to a broader pullback once all captives, both alive and dead, are handed over.

A map released by the White House showed the stages of the withdrawal under Trump’s proposed plan.

Joint Monitoring Team

The sources also disclosed that a joint operations team - comprising representatives from Hamas, Israel, Egypt, Qatar, Türkiye, and the United States - will oversee the implementation of the agreement and prevent any field incidents or disputes that could trigger renewed violence.

Dispute Over Prisoners

Regarding prisoners, Palestinian sources said their delegation submitted a list of names for release. Hamas also demanded the return of bodies of Palestinians killed and held by Israel, including senior Hamas figures and others involved in the Oct. 7, 2023, assault.

The sources said the issue “remains contentious,” with Israel vetoing the release of at least 20 prisoners and refusing to free any living detainees or hand over the bodies of those linked to the Oct. 7 attack.

This dispute, the sources added, has delayed the official announcement of the ceasefire, which had been expected to take effect at noon local time in Gaza and Makkah.

Compromise on Missing Bodies

On the issue of dead hostages, Hamas reportedly accepted a compromise proposed by mediators. Under the arrangement, joint teams from Egypt, the United States, and Türkiye will search for and identify the remains of hostages believed to be buried under rubble or collapsed tunnels after Israeli strikes.

Some of the remains, the sources said, “may have decomposed and require forensic examination,” noting that both the Israeli delegation - after consultations with Netanyahu - and Hamas agreed to the plan.

Aid Flows to Increase Gradually

The first phase of the agreement also provides for a sharp increase in humanitarian aid, allowing 400 trucks to enter Gaza daily during the first week.

The number would gradually rise to about 800 or more per day, through several land crossings opened by Israel during the war, points previously used to permit aid deliveries amid international criticism over the siege and starvation of Gaza’s population.

Next Phase: Gaza’s Future

The second phase of negotiations - expected to begin after the end of Jewish holidays or once all hostages are handed over, likely within a week - will tackle more sensitive political issues. These include Hamas’s future rule in Gaza, the territory’s postwar governance, the group’s disarmament, and safe passage for its leaders and senior members.

Mediators anticipate difficult talks on these points. Hamas sources said the movement would “maintain a positive approach” and has asked Egypt to host an “inclusive national dialogue” involving all factions, including Fatah, to discuss these critical issues.

Most Viewed

 
 
Arab World

Iraqis Queue for Fuel as Regional War Disrupts Imports

An Iraq's traffic police officer controls the queues at a petrol station in the Iraqi capital Baghdad on September 5, 2026. (AFP)
An Iraq's traffic police officer controls the queues at a petrol station in the Iraqi capital Baghdad on September 5, 2026. (AFP)
TT
TT

Iraqis Queue for Fuel as Regional War Disrupts Imports

An Iraq's traffic police officer controls the queues at a petrol station in the Iraqi capital Baghdad on September 5, 2026. (AFP)
An Iraq's traffic police officer controls the queues at a petrol station in the Iraqi capital Baghdad on September 5, 2026. (AFP)

Drivers formed long lines outside fuel stations in Baghdad on Saturday as gasoline supplies dropped in oil-rich Iraq due to import disruptions caused by the Middle East war.

Despite being OPEC's second largest oil producer, Iraq imports oil derivatives because its refineries do not produce enough gasoline to meet domestic demand.

In recent weeks, as regional hostilities drag on, long queues have been reappearing every few days, mostly outside government-run fuel stations in Baghdad and other provinces.

Baghdad resident Ibrahim Hashem waited for two hours outside a fuel station on Friday without any luck, only to return early the next day hoping to fill his car.

"It is unreasonable that we produce so many barrels of oil a day, yet still do not have enough gasoline to meet our daily needs," Hashem told AFP outside a fuel station in central Baghdad.

"We already suffer from traffic congestion because of the roads and lack of services. Now, it has become worse due to the gasoline shortage," he added.

Iraq's average daily consumption of gasoline is 33 million liters, but demand rises to 38 million when people panic over shortages, according to authorities.

The oil ministry said Friday that "regional events and the ongoing conflict are causing logistical challenges to tanker traffic, delaying their arrival at Iraqi ports."

It urged citizens to buy only the quantities they need and avoid crowding fuel stations for small amounts of gasoline.

Oil Minister Bassem Mohammed Khudair said on Friday that his ministry was addressing the "temporary shortage of gasoline" and that new shipments will arrive soon to help stabilize supplies.

Like other oil producers, Iraq has been greatly affected by the US-Iran conflict, which has choked off the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

Iraq is hugely dependent on oil exports, which make up about 90 percent of its budget revenues.

Before the war erupted in February, Iraq produced around four million barrels per day, and exported an average of 3.4 million bpd, mostly via Hormuz.

After a significant drop, Iraqi oil exports recovered to more than 2.2 million bpd in August, according to the oil ministry.

Last month, Iran's state news agency IRNA said that over the past six months, Tehran has granted permission to "a number of Iraqi oil tankers" to pass through Hormuz.

Arab World

US Ambassador Calls Violent Israeli Settlers ‘Terrorists’ After Weeks of West Bank Unrest

US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee (C-L) meets residents as he visits the West Bank village of Turmus Ayya, near Ramallah, West Bank, 05 September 2026. (EPA)
US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee (C-L) meets residents as he visits the West Bank village of Turmus Ayya, near Ramallah, West Bank, 05 September 2026. (EPA)
TT
TT

US Ambassador Calls Violent Israeli Settlers ‘Terrorists’ After Weeks of West Bank Unrest

US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee (C-L) meets residents as he visits the West Bank village of Turmus Ayya, near Ramallah, West Bank, 05 September 2026. (EPA)
US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee (C-L) meets residents as he visits the West Bank village of Turmus Ayya, near Ramallah, West Bank, 05 September 2026. (EPA)

The United States ambassador to Israel condemned Israeli settler violence in the occupied West Bank again on Saturday, calling the behavior an “act of terror" as he visited with Palestinian American residents shaken by months of attacks. 

Ambassador Mike Huckabee referred to such settlers as “terrorists,” a word that US officials usually reserve for Palestinian militants. 

“If there are squatters that come in and put up their own flags and take possession of something that does not belong to them, if they burn a car, if they torch a mosque, if they go into someone’s home and vandalize it, paint graffiti on the walls, that’s a criminal act. But it extends beyond a criminal act. It’s an act of terror,” Huckabee said during his visit to the village of Turmus Ayya, which has reported frequent attacks by settlers over the past year. 

Such attacks have surged since the war in Gaza began with the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, according to the United Nations humanitarian office. 

Huckabee also used the term “terrorists” last month after weeks of unrest in the West Bank town of Qusra, where settlers surrounded several homes including one owned by a Palestinian American. Days later, residents of the West Bank village of Bazariya said settlers burned a mosque and left a message on a wall in graffiti reading “Huckabee regards from the terrorists" in Hebrew. 

“I’m glad they admitted it,” the ambassador said Saturday of the incident, adding: “I don’t think that’s what they intended to do, but I do think that they represent a very tiny minority.” 

A week ago, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the actions of a “handful of rioters,” and the foreign ministry called the settlers’ actions “a disgrace.” 

Netanyahu’s government is the most ultranationalist and religious in Israel’s history. It has presided over a surge of settlement construction in the West Bank. Most of the international community views settlements as illegal. 

On Saturday's visit to Turmus Ayya, the ambassador began his remarks by making clear he was addressing US citizens, who make up a small percentage of the roughly 3 million Palestinians in the West Bank. 

“I’m very aware that a lot of the American people who live in Turmus Ayya and other communities across this region are not enjoying the life they deserve to live, not enjoying it in a peaceful way,” Huckabee said. “It’s a life that is disturbed by people who have created extraordinary challenges that are unfair and illegal.” 

The US Embassy can't investigate criminal activity, he said, but it can tell its host government “there are needs that need to be addressed, there are issues that cannot go unnoticed, and specific crimes and acts of terror that cannot continue without that country doing the investigation and adjudication that every person has a right to expect.” 

Huckabee met with about 10 Palestinian American residents who described the impact of the violence on their lives and properties, the municipality told The Associated Press. 

Israel captured the West Bank, along with Gaza and east Jerusalem, in the 1967 Mideast war, territories the Palestinians want for a future state. The UN and much of the international community consider them to be illegally occupied. 

Since then, the Israeli government has built nearly 150 settlements that are home to well over 500,000 Jewish settlers. Many settlements resemble developed suburbs. 

Israel’s military operates in all parts of the West Bank, but rights groups have said the military frequently turns a blind eye to settler violence. The settlers are Israeli citizens, and Israel’s defense minister recently announced plans to fully transfer law enforcement among settlers to the Israeli police. 

Arab World

Could Sudan’s Conflict Become a Regional War?

Members of the Sudanese army take part in a military parade in Gedaref in August. (AFP)
Members of the Sudanese army take part in a military parade in Gedaref in August. (AFP)
TT
TT

Could Sudan’s Conflict Become a Regional War?

Members of the Sudanese army take part in a military parade in Gedaref in August. (AFP)
Members of the Sudanese army take part in a military parade in Gedaref in August. (AFP)

Fears that Sudan’s war could turn into a regional conflict are no longer merely assessments raised by observers following cross-border strikes and mutual accusations between Sudan and Chad, alongside troubling military movements near the border with Ethiopia.

Massad Boulos, senior adviser to the US president for Arab and African affairs, conveyed those concerns to the UN Security Council, warning that the repercussions could fuel the conflict and threaten to draw neighboring countries more deeply into the war.

The US warnings do not appear to have emerged in a vacuum. They are difficult to separate from Washington’s extensive intelligence capabilities, which allow it to monitor military movements, weapons and drone routes, and cross-border networks.

Raising the level of concern to the Security Council therefore reflects a US assessment that the risks are real and growing, even if the administration has not publicly disclosed all the information on which that assessment is based.

The warning was reinforced by a call Boulos held with Chadian President Mahamat Idriss Deby following reports of a military strike inside Chadian territory.

Boulos said the two expressed “deep concern about the war in Sudan spilling across its borders, fueling further escalation and threatening regional peace and stability,” while calling for an end to external support for the warring parties.

More than three years after the war began, it is no longer simply an internal confrontation between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces. As fighting has moved into areas bordering Chad and Ethiopia and the use of sophisticated weapons has expanded, Sudan has become the center of a conflict in which the calculations of neighboring countries intersect with the interests of regional and international powers.

Growing internationalization

Evidence of the war’s internationalization can be seen in the UN Fact-Finding Mission’s finding that weapons, military technology, fighters and external supply networks are helping prolong the conflict and strengthen the capabilities of both sides.

The mission described a cross-border network linked to individuals, entities and countries that it said had provided the RSF with weapons, equipment, logistical support and foreign personnel. The countries concerned have denied the accusations, saying they remain neutral and support peace efforts.

The mission, meanwhile, said its investigations into sources of external support for the army were still at a preliminary stage.

Sudanese researcher Kholood Khair, director of Confluence Advisory, told the Financial Times in April that the war had “spread across the Red Sea, the Horn of Africa and the Sahel,” and that none of Sudan’s seven neighbors was entirely removed from its effects.

Alan Boswell, director of the Horn of Africa project at the International Crisis Group, has similarly argued that the war is dividing the region and increasing polarization among surrounding countries over the two sides.

He considers Chad and South Sudan the most exposed to its repercussions, while also pointing to the need to watch Ethiopia and tensions in Somalia.

A prolonged conflict, he has warned, could drag the region into a “spiral of violence.”

Amin Ismail Majzoub, an expert on crisis management and negotiation at the Center for Research and Strategic Studies, ruled out the conflict developing into a direct military confrontation between Sudan and neighboring countries.

He said the more likely scenario was an escalation of “proxy warfare,” through continued financial and military support and the use of mercenaries and armed groups, which would prolong the war.

Majzoub told Asharq Al-Awsat that Khartoum’s accusations against Chad and Ethiopia were, according to Sudanese authorities, based on evidence submitted to the African Union, IGAD and the Security Council, in addition to reports that bases and airports had been used in support of the RSF.

He added that if those parties moved from indirect support to declared military intervention, Sudan’s regional allies could step in to back it, at which point the conflict could expand to include the Horn of Africa and sub-Saharan Africa.

Majzoub nevertheless dismissed that scenario, saying: “This will not happen,” because a comprehensive regional war would not be welcomed by the countries of the region.

At the same time, he noted that the conflict’s repercussions were already becoming visible inside neighboring countries, citing increasingly vocal opposition groups in Chad that reject what they say is support being provided to Arab groups aligned with the RSF.

Retired Sudanese army Maj. Gen. Kamal Ismail, for his part, warned that the intersection of regional interests was gradually pushing the conflict beyond Sudan’s borders.

“We have repeatedly warned that the conflict could move from inside Sudan into the region, and the indicators point to that direction,” Ismail told Asharq Al-Awsat.

He added that the widening scope of the fighting could lead to a broader civil war and further complicate the situation.

Ismail said intensifying competition over regional interests could push some actors toward direct intervention under the pretext of protecting their interests, warning that “the longer the war continues, the more its parties lose the ability to control its course or stop it.”

He urged Sudanese to unite to halt the fighting and preserve what remains of the country.

Ethiopia and Chad

The movement of military operations into Blue Nile state near the Ethiopian border is among the most worrying developments.

Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab has published reports based on satellite imagery and open-source analysis pointing to the assembly of brigade-size military support inside an Ethiopian National Defense Force base in Asosa and linking it to RSF activity.

Asosa is significant because of its proximity to Blue Nile and the town of Kurmuk. Any military presence in the area connected to the war, if confirmed, could therefore lay the groundwork for a new border front.

To the west, Chad stands at the center of the storm because of its long border with Darfur and the tribal ties spanning both sides.

Tensions escalated after Sovereignty Council Chairman and army commander Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan accused N’Djamena of facilitating support to the RSF, while Chad denies that its territory or airports are being used to transfer weapons.

Cameron Hudson, a former US official and Sudan expert, says the repercussions of strikes inside Chad are no longer confined to the battlefield but have developed into a diplomatic confrontation.

Countries affected by the war

South Sudan may be the country most exposed to the consequences of the war. Its economy depends on exporting oil through Sudanese facilities and ports, while it has received more than 1 million Sudanese and returning South Sudanese since the fighting began.

A halt in oil exports or the spread of fighting to the border could threaten Juba’s fragile stability.

Kenya, although it does not share a border with Sudan, is exposed to the spillover of political polarization, financing and fighter networks, as well as trade disruption and damage to the role of IGAD, of which Nairobi is a key pillar.

Uganda faces similar risks through South Sudan. Any renewed eruption of instability in Juba could trigger a new refugee influx into Uganda, which already hosts more than 1 million South Sudanese refugees. In this way, the effects of the war could spread from Sudan to South Sudan and then to Uganda and Kenya without regular armies ever crossing borders.

Egypt, for its part, faces repercussions related to refugees, security along its southern border, Nile waters and the balance with Ethiopia. Eritrea fears instability spreading into eastern Sudan and the Red Sea coast.

IGAD Executive Secretary Workneh Gebeyehu has said that peace and security challenges have become too interconnected for any single country or institution to confront alone, describing Sudan as one of the clearest examples of the convergence of military confrontation, humanitarian catastrophe, institutional fragmentation, regional spillover and geopolitical rivalry.

Sudan’s war has not yet become a full-fledged regional confrontation, but it long ago moved beyond the confines of an internal conflict. As the different strands become increasingly intertwined, the question in the future may no longer be: Will the war spread into the region? But rather has it already begun?