PNN – Legal experts believe that the criteria for Hamas’s agreement and opposition to the clauses of the Trump plan are international law standards, and Hamas has completely rejected the illegal aspects of the plan.
According to the report of Pakistan News Network, the American news agency Bloomberg wrote in a report referring to US President Donald Trump’s 20-point ceasefire plan in Gaza that the Islamic resistance movement Hamas has accepted part of Trump’s proposed plan, but has refused to decide on other aspects of the proposed agreement. The report, written by Lisa Bayer, added that Hamas has said it will release Israeli prisoners, but has ignored other aspects of the proposed 20-point agreement.
Trump’s plan promises for the Palestinians
The plan is likely to lead to an immediate end to the Israeli military operation in Gaza, the immediate delivery of full aid, and the release of about 1,700 Gazans from Israeli prisons. Trump promises in the plan that none of Gazans will be forced to leave Gaza.
Trump’s promises to the Zionist regime
Bloomberg reported that one of the most ambitious goals of the plan is Hamas’ surrender and disarmament, a clause Hamas has announced it will not accept. According to the plan, the end of the Israeli military operation in Gaza will be followed by their gradual replacement by international peacekeeping forces, the influx of significant aid, and the reconstruction of the devastated areas. The plan calls for the release of 48 Israeli prisoners, 20 of whom are believed to be alive.
Read more:
Hamas official: Military option to counter Trump plan is on the table.
What will be the fate of Hamas?
Under the plan, Hamas would agree not to interfere in the administration of Gaza in any way, its members would be granted a “general amnesty” if they surrendered their weapons, and those wishing to leave Gaza would be provided with safe passage to another country.
The plan calls for Israeli forces to maintain a presence along the Gaza border until the area is “secured from any new threats.” The plan claims that international stabilization forces are tasked with training and supporting a new local police force in Gaza that would be responsible for its internal security in the long term.
Who will govern Gaza?
The plan calls for the creation of an interim committee to run public services and municipalities in Gaza, made up of Palestinian and international technocrats, overseen by an international council that includes former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and chaired by Trump.
Wissam Afife: Hamas’ response to Trump’s plan was calculated
On the other hand, political writer and analyst Wissam Afifeh emphasized in an interview with Shehab News Agency that the Hamas movement’s response to the Trump document was a combination of political realism and adherence to Palestinian national principles. Hamas did not reject or approve of Trump’s statement as a “single package,” but rather chose a piecemeal approach that distinguished between clauses.
Afifa clarified that this response does not only reflect Hamas’s position, but also the general Palestinian spirit, which was carefully and calculatedly formulated. According to this international affairs analyst, the importance of this response is that it is consistent with the Arab and Islamic positions that had clear reservations about this plan, from Egypt and Qatar to Pakistan and other countries.
Mohammad Mehran: Hamas’ response is fully consistent with international law
On the other hand, Mohammad Mehran, a professor of public international law and a member of the American and European Associations of International Law, welcomed the Hamas resistance movement’s response to Donald Trump’s proposal in an interview with Shahab News Agency, emphasizing that this response reflects high national responsibility and maintaining a balance between stopping the suffering of the Palestinian people and preserving their fundamental rights.
The legal expert strongly criticized Trump’s efforts to impose himself as the guardian of the Gaza Strip, emphasizing that this is in clear contradiction with the United Nations Charter, which prohibits interference in the internal affairs of countries and nations. He emphasized that what Trump is seeking is similar to the colonial trusteeship system that ended decades ago and has no place in contemporary international law. International law requires that any peaceful settlement be based on international resolutions, in particular Security Council resolutions 242, 338, and 2334, and General Assembly resolutions on the right of return and the right to self-determination.