As of Friday evening in Gaza, Hamas had yet to respond to a new ceasefire plan submitted by US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, a proposal Israel accepted within hours of receiving it. While Hamas says it is reviewing the plan carefully, sources within the movement indicate several serious concerns are holding up a response.
At the heart of Hamas’s hesitation is fear that the proposal’s language is too vague, particularly the section outlining a 60-day ceasefire. According to Hamas sources, the terms do not clearly obligate Israel to honor the full duration of the truce or extend it if negotiations succeed.
This ambiguity, they warn, opens the door for Israel to resume military operations in Gaza at will - much like its periodic strikes in Lebanon - especially after the first week of the deal, when a round of hostage exchanges is expected to conclude.
One Hamas official told Asharq Al-Awsat that the proposal is riddled with “traps” and imposes conditions that complicate matters for the Palestinian side.
“It’s not just about accepting or rejecting - the proposal needs clarification and likely some amendments,” the source said. Still, other figures in Hamas say the group may ultimately accept the deal if it receives guarantees on unresolved points, particularly regarding humanitarian aid.
The plan outlines the release of 125 Palestinian prisoners, all serving life or long sentences, in exchange for a phased handover of five living Israeli hostages and nine bodies.
Hamas considers this number insufficient, both in terms of proportionality and compared to past deals.
Furthermore, the proposal lacks mechanisms to ensure the war’s end, instead leaving that decision to future negotiations, a process Hamas believes would remain under the control of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has publicly resisted committing to any final resolution.
Humanitarian provisions in the proposal are another sticking point. The current draft does not guarantee the sustained entry of aid into Gaza and makes no reference to the protocols established during previous ceasefires.
Aid delivery would depend on the pace of negotiations and implementation of the agreement, with no assurance of critical items like heavy equipment for rubble removal. Distribution would also be limited to international organizations such as the UN and the Red Crescent, excluding Gaza’s private sector entirely.
Hamas officials argue that Israel’s swift acceptance of the deal is no surprise. They believe it was coordinated in advance with Washington and reflects Israeli interests above all. The proposal, they say, prioritizes Netanyahu’s conditions while offering Palestinians little in return beyond vague promises.
