Hamas is attempting to reconstitute itself in the territories it has moved back to control, doing so with an institutional makeover: pressed uniforms, new insignia, and the label “Gaza security forces.” Behind the image, however, the same power structure persists, according to observers and local sources: persecution of dissidents, summary punishment of alleged “collaborators,” and a network of social control extending across neighborhoods and camps.
The handling of humanitarian aid is another flashpoint. International organizations and actors have reported diversion, illicit fees, and logistical bottlenecks that keep supplies from reaching civilians intact. In parallel, the movement avoids speaking of disarmament. When it does, it makes any handover of weapons contingent on a future “Palestinian government” acceptable to its ranks—effectively freezing immediate progress.
That scenario conflicts with the postwar roadmap promoted by Washington. The U.S. plan envisions, in sequence, the release of hostages, a partial pullback of Israeli forces, and an effective disarmament process to lay the groundwork for a different civil administration in Gaza. Israel, for its part, insists that without a real—and verifiable—loss of Hamas’s power, any transition will be cosmetic and reversible. The disagreement is not minor: it defines timelines, interlocutors, and on-the-ground security guarantees.
Without a robust verification mechanism, the risk is a return to an unstable equilibrium in which coercive structures reemerge under a new label, while civilians are once again trapped between external promises and internal controls. The region is looking to Arab mediators to help untie the knot. Egypt, Qatar, Jordan, and the Gulf states—together with Turkey—are being called upon to exert political pressure and offer real incentives for a sustainable cease-fire and a governance scheme that does not depend on armed militias. Their role will be key to turning paper agreements into verifiable facts on the ground.
The conclusion is uncomfortable but clear: without an effective dismantling of Hamas’s military capabilities and coercive apparatus—and without an administrative alternative acceptable to the population—the Middle East plan will accumulate more obstacles than solutions. The immediate priorities are to protect civilians, ensure unhindered access to aid, and secure verifiable commitments. Everything else, for now, is rhetoric.
