As Hamas deliberates its official stance on former President Donald Trump’s recently unveiled “Gaza Prosperity and Peace Plan,” senior U.S. officials have issued stark warnings: rejection could lead to a “tragic” escalation in Gaza. Speaking on background during a State Department briefing on June 14, a senior administration official stated that “all options remain on the table” if Hamas dismisses what the U.S. describes as a “serious framework for stability” despite the plan carrying no official policy weight under the Biden administration.
Trump’s proposal, announced at a campaign rally in Nevada, calls for U.S.-led reconstruction of Gaza, Arab-Israeli normalization deals, and indefinite Israeli security control over the territory while omitting any clear path to Palestinian statehood or addressing the right of return for refugees. Though the White House has repeatedly distanced itself from the plan, calling it “a private citizen’s proposal,” the administration’s public alignment with its core premise pressuring Hamas to accept terms dictated by external powers has drawn criticism from human rights groups and regional diplomats alike.
In Doha, Hamas political leaders are consulting with regional mediators, including Qatar and Egypt, before issuing a formal reply. Internal discussions, according to sources familiar with the talks cited by Al Jazeera and Reuters, reveal deep skepticism. “They’re being asked to surrender sovereignty in exchange for rubble clearance,” said one advisor close to the negotiations. Meanwhile, in Gaza where 1.9 million people remain displaced and famine conditions persist per the UN civilians express exhaustion, not ideology. “We don’t care who proposes peace,” said schoolteacher Amina Khalaf in Khan Younis, “as long as it lets us bury our dead in dignity and rebuild without fear of the next bomb.”
The U.S. warning echoes a broader pattern: framing Palestinian armed groups as sole obstacles to peace while sidelining decades of occupation, blockade, and settlement expansion. Yet even among U.S. allies, support is thinning. The European Union reiterated on June 15 that any sustainable solution must be “Palestinian-led and grounded in international law.” Meanwhile, a youth initiative in Ramallah has begun collecting signatures for a “People’s Peace Charter,” demanding that any future agreement include direct representation from Gaza’s displaced communities.
History offers cautionary lessons. The 2006 U.S.-backed ultimatum to Hamas after its electoral victory demanding recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence, and acceptance of prior agreements led not to moderation, but to isolation, blockade, and eventual conflict. Today, with Gaza’s infrastructure in ruins and cholera spreading through contaminated water, another top-down ultimatum risks deepening despair rather than delivering peace.
Hamas may yet respond but the real question isn’t whether they say yes or no. It’s whether the world will finally listen to the people beneath the rubble, who have long known that peace cannot be threatened into existence. Because when you tell the hungry that rejection means more bombs, you’re not offering peace you’re just renaming the war.
0 Comments