Jerusalem grapples with rare opening for diplomacy as pressure mounts from Washington, regional allies, and domestic hardliners.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces one of the most complex political challenges of his career after Hamas signaled partial acceptance of U.S. President Donald Trump’s Gaza peace plan, a proposal that could reshape the dynamics of the Middle East if pursued.
While the move is being hailed internationally as a potential turning point after more than a year of devastating conflict in Gaza, it has plunged Netanyahu’s fragile coalition into turmoil. Within Israel, the idea of even limited negotiations with Hamas is stirring fierce debate between those seeking long-term security and those demanding absolute military victory.
A Surprising Shift in Hamas’ Tone
In a statement released over the weekend, senior Hamas officials said they were “willing to engage constructively” with elements of Trump’s proposed peace framework, particularly those involving a ceasefire, prisoner exchanges, and phased humanitarian relief, while rejecting conditions that would require full disarmament or Israeli military oversight of Gaza.
“We are open to dialogue that respects Palestinian sovereignty and the right to self-determination,” a Hamas spokesperson said from Doha. “Any peace plan must be based on justice and dignity, not surrender.”
This marks a significant shift for the militant group, which had previously dismissed U.S.-brokered peace efforts as biased toward Israel. Diplomats say the group’s partial acceptance is likely driven by war fatigue, internal pressure from Gaza’s civilian population, and mounting economic collapse across the enclave.
Netanyahu’s Tightrope: Between Washington and the Right Wing
The announcement has placed Netanyahu in a strategic and political dilemma. On one hand, Washington — led by Trump’s renewed diplomatic offensive — is urging Israel to seize the opportunity to end hostilities and pursue a negotiated framework. On the other, Netanyahu’s right-wing coalition partners have threatened to withdraw from the government if he even considers talks with Hamas.
“Israel cannot negotiate with terrorists,” said Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, one of Netanyahu’s most vocal coalition allies. “Any talks will be seen as a betrayal of our fallen soldiers and the victims of Hamas’ brutality.”
Behind closed doors, however, Israeli security officials are reportedly urging Netanyahu to explore the proposal, noting that Hamas’ apparent flexibility could provide Israel a diplomatic opening to secure the release of hostages and a lasting ceasefire.
A senior official from Israel’s security cabinet told Haaretz that the prime minister faces “immense pressure from Washington to respond positively”, particularly after the Biden administration signaled that future U.S. military aid could be contingent on Israel’s cooperation in peace efforts.
Trump’s Plan: Old Framework, New Context
Trump’s proposed peace plan — reintroduced in 2025 with adjustments — envisions a multi-phase process leading to the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian governance structure in Gaza and parts of the West Bank, backed by regional Arab funding and international security guarantees.
Unlike the 2020 “Deal of the Century,” which was rejected by Palestinians at the time, the updated proposal reportedly includes provisions for joint reconstruction projects, international monitoring of Gaza’s borders, and a temporary suspension of Israeli settlement expansion.
“What’s different this time is that both sides are exhausted,” said Dr. Yael Aronson, a Middle East analyst at Tel Aviv University. “After months of devastation, the calculus has shifted from total victory to political survival.”
Trump, who has positioned himself as a potential peace broker ahead of the 2026 U.S. elections, has publicly urged both sides to “act with courage and vision,” claiming that “peace is closer than anyone realizes.”
Regional Players React
The partial acceptance by Hamas has reverberated across the Middle East. Egypt, which has hosted multiple rounds of indirect talks, praised the move as “a positive step toward de-escalation.” Qatar and Turkey, both of which maintain ties with Hamas, have expressed cautious optimism that the group’s tone signals readiness for pragmatic engagement.
However, Saudi Arabia and Jordan remain skeptical. Riyadh’s foreign ministry issued a statement emphasizing that “any peace plan must include a clear path toward Palestinian statehood.”
Meanwhile, Iran — Hamas’ chief military backer — has criticized the group’s overture, calling it “a dangerous deviation from the resistance axis.” Analysts say Tehran fears losing its influence over the Palestinian movement if Hamas enters Western-backed negotiations.
The Israeli Public: War Fatigue vs. Distrust
Public opinion in Israel is deeply divided. Polls show that 58% of Israelis support exploring peace talks if it means an end to the fighting and the safe return of hostages. However, nearly 40% oppose any form of dialogue with Hamas, arguing that it legitimizes terrorism.
The emotional weight of the conflict — with more than 30,000 Gazans dead and hundreds of Israeli soldiers lost — has eroded national unity. Anti-government protests, which initially focused on judicial reform, have evolved into broader demands for Netanyahu’s resignation and new elections.
“Israelis want peace, but they also want justice,” said Noa Klein, a Tel Aviv-based political scientist. “The question is whether Netanyahu can deliver either without alienating half the country.”
A Fragile Window for Diplomacy
International observers warn that the current diplomatic window may be brief. The situation on the ground remains volatile, with sporadic rocket fire from Gaza and Israeli airstrikes on suspected Hamas positions.
European and U.N. mediators are reportedly preparing a summit in Cairo next week, where representatives from Israel, Hamas, and the United States could hold indirect talks under Egyptian auspices.
If successful, the talks could lead to a temporary ceasefire and the opening of humanitarian corridors, setting the stage for broader negotiations on Gaza’s future governance.
“We are at an inflection point,” said Tor Wennesland, the U.N. special coordinator for the Middle East peace process. “The choices made in the coming weeks will determine whether this region moves toward stability or spirals into another decade of bloodshed.”
Netanyahu’s Political Survival at Stake
For Netanyahu, the stakes could not be higher. His government’s survival depends on maintaining support from far-right ministers who oppose any compromise. Yet alienating Washington — Israel’s most critical ally — could have severe diplomatic and economic repercussions.
Insiders suggest that Netanyahu may delay a formal response to Hamas’ statement while gauging both domestic reaction and Trump’s next move. However, time is running out: as pressure mounts from international partners and Israel’s opposition parties, calls for a national unity government are growing louder.
“Netanyahu is cornered,” said Eyal Zisser, dean of humanities at Tel Aviv University. “He can either lead Israel toward a historic peace or watch his coalition — and perhaps his legacy — collapse.”
Conclusion: Between Opportunity and Uncertainty
Hamas’ partial acceptance of Trump’s Gaza peace plan has opened a rare, fragile pathway toward de-escalation — but one fraught with risk, mistrust, and political peril. For the first time in years, both sides appear to have something to gain from diplomacy, and much to lose from defiance.
Whether Netanyahu seizes this opportunity or succumbs to political pressure may determine not just Israel’s future, but the course of the Middle East for a generation to come.
