On October 14, 2025, United States President Donald Trump formally declared the immediate initiation of the second stage of the critical peace process aimed at stabilizing the volatile Gaza Strip. This new phase is singularly focused on achieving the complete and verifiable disarmament of the militant group Hamas. Addressing the press corps, the President delivered a stark ultimatum: if the organization fails to meet its obligations to surrender its arsenal, the United States stands ready to enforce compliance. This pivotal announcement followed the successful conclusion of the initial phase of the comprehensive agreement, which had been formalized and signed just days earlier, on October 9, in the Egyptian resort city of Sharm el-Sheikh.
The requirement for Hamas to disarm is not merely a procedural step; it is the absolute cornerstone of the 20-point plan devised by Trump’s administration to establish a durable and sustainable settlement in the long-troubled region. President Trump made it clear that he expects the group to complete this process within a “moderate period of time.” He emphasized that his administration views this commitment with utmost seriousness, warning, “They said they were going to disarm, and if they don’t, we will disarm them. They know I am not playing games.” The President did not mince words regarding the potential consequences of resistance, cautioning that the enforced disarmament could be executed “quickly and possibly brutally,” signaling Washington’s zero-tolerance policy toward delays or defiance.
However, the smooth progression envisioned by Washington hit an immediate roadblock. The response from Hamas to the demand for disarmament was fiercely negative and uncompromising. A high-ranking official spokesperson for the group publicly rejected any implication that they had consented to relinquish their weapons under international scrutiny, branding the transfer of arms as “unacceptable and non-negotiable.” This direct contradiction of the stated terms throws the entire timeline into jeopardy. The transition to the second phase is fundamentally contingent upon Hamas’s compliance, as this stage is also slated to involve the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territory and the crucial initiation of large-scale reconstruction projects necessary to rebuild the devastated region.
The overall security situation remains precariously tense. Even amidst the formal declarations of a truce, reports continue to circulate detailing ongoing security incidents and further casualties among the Palestinian population residing in the Gaza Strip. Political analysts are unified in their assessment that Hamas’s categorical refusal to disarm poses an existential threat to the integrity and viability of the entire peace framework. Within the architecture of the agreement, the surrender of weapons was designed to be the essential “mutual concession” required to build confidence, ensure long-term security guarantees, and pave the way for effective future governance within the densely populated enclave. Without this step, the foundation of the entire diplomatic effort risks crumbling, potentially leading to a renewed escalation of conflict.