Former President Donald Trump announced late Thursday that Hamas had agreed to fully disarm, along with all other armed groups in Gaza, in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal from the territory. Trump hailed the announcement on his social media platform as a “historic breakthrough” and an “amazing development that everybody said could never be achieved.”

While such an agreement, if genuine and verifiable, would represent a significant step toward peace in the Middle East, the initial response to the announcement was cautious and muted. Critics pointed to Trump’s history of prematurely declaring peace deals before finalizing key details, casting doubt on the current announcement’s viability.

Traditionally, peace agreements involving complex regional conflicts require all parties to participate directly in negotiations to ensure clarity on the obligations, timelines, and sequencing of actions. Public statements are usually coordinated to avoid misunderstandings. In contrast, details of this announcement remain unclear and inconsistent. Hamas took several hours to respond, and its proposed timeline notably diverges from Trump’s. Hamas stated it would disarm only after Israeli troops withdraw from Gaza, whereas Trump suggested the opposite sequence. Such disagreements could quickly undermine the agreement.

Another notable absence was any public statement from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who met with Trump just two days prior. Netanyahu has maintained a hardline stance toward Gaza following the October 7 attacks by Hamas and is facing a parliamentary election in October. Agreeing to a peace deal with Hamas on the eve of the election would represent a dramatic political shift and has not been endorsed by his office.

Observers noted that the announcement lost momentum soon after it was made public, with many viewing it as another in a series of premature declarations by Trump. Over the years, Trump has proclaimed multiple ceasefires between Israel and Hamas, only for them to collapse after brief periods. This pattern has led to skepticism about the durability of such agreements under his involvement.

The announcement arrives amid a challenging period for Trump politically, with the U.S. midterm elections approaching and ongoing tensions related to Iran and broader regional conflicts. Some analysts interpret the deal as a distraction from pressing domestic concerns, such as economic issues affecting American households.

While there remains a possibility that the current declaration could lead to meaningful progress, skepticism persists given the lack of coordination, official endorsements, and concrete steps from the key parties involved. Many experts emphasize that lasting peace will require more than high-profile announcements—it demands detailed negotiations, mutual trust, and enforceable commitments. As Trump approaches the later stages of his political career, questions remain about whether his approach to Middle East diplomacy has adapted to these realities.