The newly announced Gaza peace roadmap, overseen by the Board of Peace established under the Trump administration, aims to disarm Hamas, facilitate an Israeli withdrawal, and institute a technocratic Palestinian government to govern Gaza. The 15-point plan was unveiled on July 31, 2026, with the intent to transition the war-torn territory towards stability and reconstruction. The agreement marks a potential turning point in a conflict that has persisted since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 and escalated with the outbreak of war in October 2023.
At the center of the roadmap is Hamas’ formal pledge to dismantle its military wing, a move unprecedented in recent decades. Hamas negotiator Ghazi Hamad described the agreement as a “full package” involving concessions intended to benefit the people of Gaza, emphasizing that Hamas will proceed only once certain Israel fulfills its obligations. Israel has not publicly commented on the agreement, while Israeli officials stress the importance of verified disarmament and retaining the ability to act decisively against any future threats.
Nickolay Mladenov, director-general of the Board of Peace and an experienced diplomat, acknowledged the complexities involved, underscoring the necessity that “implementation and verification have to be real.” The plan calls for a phased process: Hamas would surrender weapons under international supervision, including thousands of assault rifles, rocket launchers, and extensive tunnels, while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) would gradually withdraw from Gaza in parallel. The newly formed National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAS), led by Dr. Ali Shaath, is tasked with governing Gaza during the transition, restoring public services, and establishing a new police force independent of Hamas control.
President Donald Trump hailed the roadmap as a “monumental step” and “a big step for the Middle East,” though he acknowledged the challenge ahead given the complexities on the ground. The Board of Peace includes over two dozen countries from the Middle East and beyond, although some key nations, including Germany and the UK, remain as observers rather than full members. The plan also envisions deployment of an International Stabilization Force composed of soldiers from Arab and Muslim-majority countries to monitor compliance, secure humanitarian aid, and train Palestinian law enforcement. However, this force faces setbacks, such as Indonesia placing its troop contribution on indefinite hold following heightened regional tensions.
Despite the historic nature of the agreement, skepticism remains about its feasibility. Experts highlight the challenges of collecting thousands of weapons scattered across Gaza and question Hamas’ continued ties to Iran, which supplies arms and funding to the group. Some analysts also note potential friction with the Palestinian Authority, which governs the West Bank and was excluded from negotiations. Observers caution that disarmament must be paired with a robust strategy for deradicalization to prevent Hamas or similar groups from regrouping in the future.
The humanitarian and reconstruction needs are immense. The United Nations, World Bank, and European Union estimate that rebuilding Gaza will require approximately $70 billion, far beyond the $7 billion pledged thus far by the Board of Peace members. While some envision Gaza’s future as a “deradicalized terror-free zone” with economic development and security, the path to realization remains uncertain. Key stakeholders agree that success depends not only on disarmament and international oversight but also on sustained efforts to address underlying ideological and political divisions.
The agreement represents a significant, albeit tentative, step in postwar Gaza’s future. It places considerable responsibility on local actors, Israel, and international partners to navigate a delicate transition in a region marked by deep-seated tensions and security concerns.