โ† Home
Home โ€บ Top Stories
Top Stories

Israel rejects Trump's 15-point Gaza plan; Netanyahu firm on Hamas disarmament

๐Ÿ“… 2026-08-09 ๐Ÿ“‚ Top Stories Original source โ†—
Israel rejects Trump's 15-point Gaza plan; Netanyahu firm on Hamas disarmament
Representative image ยท Pexels (free license)
Key points

Israel has formally rejected the 15-point Gaza plan floated by former US President Donald Trump, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu making it clear that no withdrawal from the enclave will happen until Hamas is disarmed. The rejection, confirmed across multiple reports on Sunday, throws the proposed framework into uncertainty and leaves the region bracing for what comes next.

Netanyahu's stance was blunt. In remarks carried by Israeli and international media, he asserted that Israel knows how to stand up to American ideas, signalling that the plan, as presented, does not meet Israel's security demands. The Prime Minister's office has not offered any revised counter-proposal, and officials have not yet confirmed whether talks with Washington will continue in another format.

What the 15-point plan proposed

The Trump plan, details of which have been circulating in diplomatic circles for weeks, was designed as a phased roadmap to end the current hostilities. It reportedly included provisions for a ceasefire, prisoner exchanges, and a staged Israeli military withdrawal from Gaza, tied to security guarantees and a broader political horizon for Palestinians.

But the core sticking point has always been disarmament. The plan's language on Hamas's weapons was seen by Israeli officials as too weak, and by Hamas as unacceptable. Netanyahu's rejection suggests that any deal that does not begin with the complete dismantling of Hamas's military wing is a non-starter for Jerusalem.

Hamas calls on Washington to pressure Israel

On the other side, Hamas has responded by urging the United States to lean on Netanyahu. A senior Hamas official told NDTV that Washington must pressure the Israeli Prime Minister to accept the deal, arguing that the plan offers a realistic path to de-escalation. The official framed the rejection as an obstacle to peace, insisting that Hamas's own position on the plan remains open to negotiation.

This puts the Biden administration, or whichever US administration is in office by now, in a delicate spot. Washington has historically avoided publicly confronting Israeli leaders on security matters, but the collapse of this initiative could push the region back toward a cycle of violence that neither side can afford.

What rejection means for the ground

On the ground, the rejection is unlikely to change the immediate military reality. Israeli forces remain positioned across Gaza, and there is no indication of any drawdown in the coming days. Humanitarian agencies, already stretched thin, have warned that any further delay in a political agreement will deepen the suffering of civilians caught in the crossfire.

Meanwhile, regional mediators, including Egypt and Qatar, have stayed quiet so far, perhaps waiting to see if the US can salvage the framework. Their silence suggests that the ball is now in Washington's court, and that the next move may determine whether this plan is revived, rewritten, or shelved entirely.

What to watch

All eyes now turn to Washington. Will the US administration publicly push back on Netanyahu's rejection, or will it quietly attempt to broker a revised deal? For now, neither side has walked away from the table officially, but the window for a negotiated settlement appears to be narrowing. The coming weeks will show whether the 15-point plan is a dead letter or a starting point for something tougher.

Verify this story
Reported by Al Jazeera. This article was written with AI assistance from publicly available reporting โ€” always cross-check important details with the original coverage.
This content is AI-assisted and published for information only. TIVRA News links every story to its original source above โ€” please verify dates, figures and statements there. See our Disclaimer and Editorial Policy.