Gaza disarmament agreement: A turning point that could end the war—or a new test for peace?

The United Arab Emirates has welcomed the announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump that the Peace Council has reached a historic agreement on the disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups in the Gaza Strip, as part of President Trump’s 20-point plan to end the war in Gaza.

The UAE affirmed that this step represents a significant development toward ending the conflict, enhancing security and stability, and creating the necessary conditions to launch a political process leading to lasting peace.

A landmark agreement has been announced on the disarmament of Hamas and other armed factions in the Gaza Strip under US President Donald Trump’s roadmap to end the war, in what has been described as the most significant political and security breakthrough since the conflict erupted in October 2023—provided it is successfully implemented.

According to the roadmap, the agreement envisages a phased process that includes a cessation of military operations, the disarmament of armed groups under international supervision, and the transfer of Gaza’s administration to a transitional Palestinian body known as the National Committee for Gaza Administration. The plan also calls for the deployment of an international stabilization force alongside a gradual Israeli withdrawal tied to progress in meeting agreed security commitments.

However, the implementation of the agreement continues to face considerable obstacles. Israel insists that the complete disarmament of Hamas and other armed groups must precede any full military withdrawal from Gaza, while Hamas maintains that any discussion of relinquishing its weapons is contingent upon a permanent ceasefire, a full Israeli withdrawal, and the fulfillment of humanitarian commitments.

If implemented as announced, the agreement would represent far more than another ceasefire. It would fundamentally reshape Gaza’s political, security and administrative landscape.

For the first time, disarmament has been placed at the center of a comprehensive peace framework rather than treated as a long-term consequence of a political settlement. This marks a clear departure from previous initiatives, which largely focused on temporary ceasefires, hostage and prisoner exchanges, and humanitarian relief without directly addressing the future of armed groups in Gaza.

The announced framework is built around five principal pillars.

The agreement calls for:

An international stabilization force, supported by an independent verification mechanism, would oversee compliance with these provisions.

The agreement envisages the dissolution of the current governing structure in Gaza and the transfer of executive authority to a transitional Palestinian technocratic committee composed of independent, non-partisan figures.

The committee would be responsible for:

Israeli forces would not withdraw in a single step. Instead, each stage of the withdrawal would be linked to verified progress in the disarmament process and the new administration’s ability to establish effective control on the ground.

This conditional approach makes every phase of implementation dependent on the successful completion of the previous one.

The agreement provides for the deployment of an international force tasked with:

If deployed, it would mark the first time an international force has been assigned such an executive stabilization role in Gaza under the current peace framework.

The agreement links Gaza’s reconstruction directly to the restoration of security and stability.

Once the initial implementation stages are completed, reconstruction efforts would include:

Over the past decades, most diplomatic initiatives have focused primarily on:

The new agreement seeks to address the underlying security dimensions of the conflict by linking the end of the war to a comprehensive restructuring of governance and security in Gaza.

This makes it considerably more ambitious than previous initiatives, but also significantly more difficult to implement.

Despite the announcement, implementation remains fraught with challenges, including:

Statements from the parties involved indicate that substantial differences remain regarding the sequencing of obligations, raising concerns over the pace—and even the viability—of implementation.

Politically, the agreement represents the most comprehensive opportunity to date to bring the Gaza war to an end and launch a transitional phase for the territory.

Its ultimate success, however, will depend on the ability of international mediators to secure compliance, the willingness of all parties to honor their commitments, and progress on the most contentious issues—including disarmament, Israel’s withdrawal, and the future governance of Gaza.

For now, the real test lies not in the announcement itself, but in whether the agreement can be translated into realities on the ground.