TPC Staff
The Palestine Chronicle / June 13, 2026
Palestinian factions have linked any weapons arrangements in Gaza to Israeli withdrawal, ceasefire implementation, and statehood guarantees.
Resistance details conditions
Palestinian Resistance factions have outlined a detailed response to a mediators’ roadmap for Gaza, linking any future weapons-control measures to the full implementation of a ceasefire agreement, Israeli military withdrawal, and a political process leading to Palestinian statehood.
According to documents obtained by Al-Mayadeen, the factions’ response establishes a phased framework governing security arrangements, post-war administration, and the future of armed groups in the Gaza Strip.
Ceasefire obligations first
According to the document, any process involving the exclusivity or regulation of weapons in Gaza would only begin after the completion of the first phase of the ceasefire agreement and the fulfilment of all related obligations.
The factions said these obligations include adherence to Israeli withdrawal lines, a complete halt to military attacks, and full implementation of humanitarian measures.
The first phase would also require the entry of a Palestinian national committee, the deployment of an international stabilization force, and the dismantling of armed militias operating outside the agreed framework.
Only after these measures are completed would discussions regarding weapons control move forward.
No weapons to be handed to Israel
The response outlines a phased approach to handling heavy weapons and military infrastructure, tied to a timetable that would be agreed upon following an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.
According to the document, the process would proceed in parallel with a gradual Israeli withdrawal from areas still occupied in the Strip.
The factions stressed that implementation would be carried out through a Palestinian national committee working in coordination with Palestinian factions and political organizations.
The document explicitly rejects the transfer of weapons to Israel or to any external party.
“No weapons will be handed over to the Israeli occupation or any non-Palestinian party,” the response states.
The weapons-exclusivity process would formally begin only after the Palestinian national committee assumes its responsibilities.
Statehood linked to security arrangements
The response also ties any future security arrangements to a broader political framework.
According to the document, discussions concerning weapons cannot be separated from what the resistance groups described as a clear political horizon guaranteeing Palestinian national rights.
The response states that any agreement must be connected to a political process that ensures the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
“The agreement must lead to a political track guaranteeing the right to establish a Palestinian state,” the document states.
Response submitted during Cairo talks
The latest details emerged after Hamas submitted its response on June 10 to a 15-point roadmap presented by mediators during negotiations in Cairo.
The talks, which began on June 7, involved Egyptian, Qatari, and Turkish mediators, alongside representatives of Hamas and other Palestinian Resistance factions.
The negotiations form part of ongoing efforts to advance the second phase of the ceasefire agreement announced in October.
According to sources cited by Al Mayadeen, the resistance factions’ response also emphasized the need to pressure Israel to halt military operations during negotiations and to cease assassinations.
The response further called for verification of Israeli compliance with previous commitments before advancing to any subsequent stage of implementation.
Governance proposal for Gaza
The document also addresses governance arrangements for the Gaza Strip following the war.
According to Hadi al-Dali, a specialist in Palestinian Resistance affairs cited by Al Mayadeen, Hamas agreed to transfer administrative authority in Gaza to a governance committee that would assume legal and administrative responsibilities.
The proposal appears aimed at creating a transitional framework for post-war governance while broader political arrangements are negotiated.
The response ultimately places responsibility on mediators and the United States to advance a process capable of transforming ceasefire arrangements into a broader political settlement.
