Gaza — In a critical development in the ongoing Israel-Gaza war, Hamas has formally responded to a U.S.-backed ceasefire proposal, stating it is prepared to release 10 live Israeli hostages and the bodies of 18 deceased captives in exchange for an agreed-upon number of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails. However, the group also demanded significant modifications to the proposed ceasefire framework, raising new diplomatic hurdles.
The response, which falls short of outright rejection or acceptance, was delivered to U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff, President Donald Trump’s special representative for Middle East negotiations. Hamas emphasized the need for a permanent ceasefire, the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, and guarantees for the sustained delivery of humanitarian aid—none of which were included in the U.S. proposal currently on the table.
A senior Hamas official said the group remains committed to its core demands, including a full end to the war and lifting the blockade. “This is not a clear ‘no,’ but it is certainly not a ‘yes,’” the source added, reflecting the movement’s attempt to keep diplomatic doors open without compromising its red lines.
“The operation was devastating to our communities. The suffering of the 2.2 million people in Gaza cannot be ignored,” a Hamas representative told Al Jazeera.
While Hamas is under increasing internal and external pressure, it also recognizes it cannot afford to reject the U.S. proposal outright, especially as Israel prepares for an expanded ground offensive.
Witkoff responded with strong language, calling Hamas’s reply “completely unacceptable” and a move that would only delay peace efforts.
“Hamas must accept the framework we’ve put forward as the basis for near-term negotiations. Only then can we move toward a 60-day ceasefire and initiate phased agreements,” Witkoff said in a press release.
He emphasized that Israel has already accepted the updated terms of the U.S. plan and that Hamas is the only party obstructing progress.
A statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office reiterated that Israel remains committed to the U.S.-proposed framework.
“Israel has agreed to the revised Witkoff document aimed at securing the release of our hostages. Hamas continues its pattern of rejection and delay,” the statement read.
Israeli leaders remain firmly opposed to any deal that locks them into a permanent ceasefire without dismantling Hamas’s military capabilities. Netanyahu insists the war will end only when Hamas has disarmed, its leaders exiled from Gaza, and its governance dismantled.
The situation in Gaza remains dire. Over the past 24 hours alone, 60 Palestinians were killed and 284 injured in Israeli airstrikes, according to the Hamas-run Health Ministry. The total death toll in Gaza since the war began in October 2023 now exceeds 54,000, with thousands more missing or injured.
Hamas claims that it agreed in principle to parts of last week’s proposal but that Israel’s version of the agreement did not align with what had been discussed.
“Why is Israel’s word always treated as final in negotiations? This bias undermines the credibility of any neutral mediation,” said senior Hamas official Basem Naim in an interview with the BBC.
The war began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a deadly cross-border attack, killing around 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages. In response, Israel launched a massive military campaign in Gaza, pledging to destroy Hamas’s military infrastructure.
Despite several failed ceasefire attempts, mediated by Egypt, Qatar, and the United States, a lasting truce has remained elusive. The humanitarian situation in Gaza has deteriorated to historic lows, with hospitals overwhelmed, food and water scarce, and over 80% of the population displaced.
Analysts believe the next 72 hours will be crucial. While international pressure mounts on both sides, including growing protests in Tel Aviv demanding hostage release, Netanyahu’s government is determined to keep military pressure on Hamas.
Meanwhile, Hamas faces its toughest diplomatic dilemma yet: whether to maintain its political stance at the risk of annihilation or engage in a ceasefire that could ultimately weaken its long-term influence.