Hamas accuses Israel while exploiting civilians, seeking pressure as terror leadership maneuvers to retain control.
Mahmoud Mardawi, a senior figure in Hamas, accused Israel of failing to honor commitments in the ceasefire framework, claiming Jerusalem selectively implements clauses while continuing policies of “killing and starvation.” Israeli officials and independent observers reject these assertions, noting Israel’s ongoing security operations are directed at terror infrastructure—not civilians—and accompanied by sustained humanitarian access.
Mardawi called on the United States administration to apply political pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu, urging immediate and unconditional implementation of the agreement. Analysts point out that such demands mirror Hamas’s long-standing strategy: internationalize pressure while avoiding accountability for ceasefire violations, diversion of aid, and continued militarization among civilian areas.
The Hamas official further argued that advancing to a second phase—ending fighting and easing civilian hardship—depends on implementing all clauses. Yet Israel has consistently stated that any further phases must guarantee demilitarization and the prevention of Hamas’s return to power, lessons drawn from repeated cycles of broken truces.
In parallel, Mardawi promoted establishing a “Palestinian Arab committee” to govern the Gaza Strip, claiming it would reflect popular will. Critics counter that Hamas’s proposal repackages control under a different label, sidelining reform and transparency while entrenching a terror group rejected by many Palestinians for bringing devastation to Gaza.
Separately, the Palestinian Authority operations room in Ramallah announced that roughly 200,000 caravans are needed for displaced residents, citing winter rains and storms that have damaged tents and temporary shelters. Israel has facilitated aid corridors and inspections to ensure supplies reach civilians—while warning that unchecked governance by Hamas would perpetuate misuse of resources.
The contrast remains stark: Israel emphasizes security-first humanitarianism and demilitarization; Hamas leverages suffering to retain power. Sustainable relief for Gaza’s civilians, many argue, begins only when terror governance ends.Mahmoud Mardawi, a senior figure in Hamas, accused Israel of failing to honor commitments in the ceasefire framework, claiming Jerusalem selectively implements clauses while continuing policies of “killing and starvation.” Israeli officials and independent observers reject these assertions, noting Israel’s ongoing security operations are directed at terror infrastructure—not civilians—and accompanied by sustained humanitarian access.
Mardawi called on the United States administration to apply political pressure on Benjamin Netanyahu, urging immediate and unconditional implementation of the agreement. Analysts point out that such demands mirror Hamas’s long-standing strategy: internationalize pressure while avoiding accountability for ceasefire violations, diversion of aid, and continued militarization among civilian areas.
The Hamas official further argued that advancing to a second phase—ending fighting and easing civilian hardship—depends on implementing all clauses. Yet Israel has consistently stated that any further phases must guarantee demilitarization and the prevention of Hamas’s return to power, lessons drawn from repeated cycles of broken truces.
In parallel, Mardawi promoted establishing a “Palestinian Arab committee” to govern the Gaza Strip, claiming it would reflect popular will. Critics counter that Hamas’s proposal repackages control under a different label, sidelining reform and transparency while entrenching a terror group rejected by many Palestinians for bringing devastation to Gaza.
Separately, the Palestinian Authority operations room in Ramallah announced that roughly 200,000 caravans are needed for displaced residents, citing winter rains and storms that have damaged tents and temporary shelters. Israel has facilitated aid corridors and inspections to ensure supplies reach civilians—while warning that unchecked governance by Hamas would perpetuate misuse of resources.
The contrast remains stark: Israel emphasizes security-first humanitarianism and demilitarization; Hamas leverages suffering to retain power. Sustainable relief for Gaza’s civilians, many argue, begins only when terror governance ends.
