Sally Ibrahim
The New Arab / August 17, 2026
The talks focused on the most difficult issue facing the process: what happens to Hamas and its weapons.
Gaza – The recent Cairo talks between Hamas and US officials, notable US president Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, have exposed a widening gap over the movement’s future in Gaza, with Washington demanding an end to its military role while Hamas seeks a political path that would allow it to remain part of the Palestinian system.
On Sunday, US envoy Kushner held a rare direct meeting with Hamas political bureau chief Khalil al-Hayya in Egypt.
The meeting was attended by Egyptian, Qatari and Turkish officials, as well as US envoy Nikolay Mladenov and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, as Washington seeks to revive its 15-point roadmap and advance negotiations towards a second phase which Israel has publicly rejected.
The talks focused on the most difficult issue facing the process: what happens to Hamas and its weapons.
According to Israeli media outlets, Kushner told Hamas that the Trump administration wanted to pursue a political path involving Palestinians, but that the movement first needed to dismantle its military capabilities, transfer control of Gaza to a Palestinian government and refrain from interfering in its administration.
Hamas, for its part, has linked any move on its weapons to Israeli steps, including an end to its daily deadly attacks that has killed over 1,400 people since the ceasefire, and a guarantee of an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.
Preserving a political role
In a press statement on Monday, Hamas has indicated that it could transfer responsibility for Gaza to a Palestinian government and participate in future elections, but it has not agreed to surrender its weapons without guarantees over Israel’s actions.
“Hamas’s statement was careful, not mentioning Kushner directly, hinting at sensitive contacts,” Gaza-based political analyst Taysir Abdullah told The New Arab.
Abdullah said Hamas appeared keen to maintain a relationship with the Trump administration, with Qatar and Turkey helping facilitate that channel. But he cautioned against interpreting the Cairo meeting as an agreement.
One of Washington’s messages, according to hims, was that Hamas should not base its calculations on Israeli elections or wait for a possible change in government.
“Hamas is playing for time,” Abdullah said, adding that the movement could be hoping for political changes in Israel that might create space for its continued involvement.
Political analyst Mustafa Ibrahim offered a more pessimistic assessment of Hamas’s calculations.
He told TNA that the movement still appeared to be relying on time and political developments, including the possibility of participating in future Palestinian elections with international or US guarantees.
But Ibrahim argued that the reality on the ground was moving in the opposite direction.
The United States and Israel, he said, appeared determined to prevent Hamas from retaining the role it had before the war, particularly its military presence in Gaza.
Hamas may therefore be trying to preserve a political foothold, but the conditions being imposed by Washington and Israel make its return to the previous political arrangement increasingly unlikely, Ibrahim said.
Disarmament
The Trump administration’s roadmap places disarmament at the centre of its proposed transition in Gaza. Other elements include an end to military operations, Israeli withdrawal, the transfer of administration to Palestinians, reconstruction and the deployment of an international stabilisation force.
Israeli media reported that Kushner made clear that Hamas’s disarmament could not be indefinitely postponed.
Washington has also indicated that it could help guarantee Israeli commitments if Hamas takes concrete steps towards dismantling its military capabilities.
Political analyst Akram Atallah told TNA that the direct contact between Kushner and Hamas’s leadership was important but came too late.
The meeting “should have happened a long time ago to stop the bloodshed of Palestinians,” Atallah said.
He warned, however, against reading the talks as evidence of a fundamental change in US policy towards Hamas.
“The United States and Israel do not appear prepared to accept Hamas continuing with the same strength and in the same form as before the war,” he said.
Atallah linked the pressure on Hamas to wider regional changes and efforts to establish a new political and security order in the Middle East, which have further reduced the movement’s room for manoeuvre.
Hamas could seek to participate in future elections and secure US guarantees for that participation, he said, but added that “the regional and international reality is different.”
“Israel and the United States are pushing for an end to Hamas’s military presence in Gaza,” Atallah added.
Balancing act
Washington’s approach faced stiff resistance from Israel.
Kushner, Mladenov and Blair are expected to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss measures Israel would be expected to take alongside progress on Hamas’s disarmament.
According to US sources, Israel is particularly concerned about Washington’s reported demand to halt targeted killings of Hamas members, amid Israeli claims that the movement is attempting to rebuild its military capabilities.
Netanyahu’s Likud party has also rejected criticism from Arab and Islamic countries over Israel’s position on the Trump plan, accusing them of seeking to weaken the Israeli prime minister and force concessions.
The disagreement means that even if Hamas were to move towards disarmament, questions would remain over what Israel would be prepared to offer in return.
For Hamas, giving up its weapons without a clear Israeli withdrawal could eliminate its remaining leverage. For Israel and Washington, allowing the movement to retain its military capabilities while entering the political process would conflict with their vision for post-war Gaza.
Egypt has emerged as a key actor in efforts to keep the negotiations moving. Kushner also met Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who, according to sources, stressed the importance of adhering to the ceasefire agreement.
One source familiar with the meetings said Sisi argued that the Gaza war had contributed to wider regional instability and that restoring calm in the Strip would have consequences beyond Gaza.
Egypt, Qatar and Turkey are now working with Washington to prevent the process from stalling before the second phase can begin.
For Cairo, the stakes also include humanitarian aid and reconstruction, both of which could be delayed by a prolonged political deadlock.
But the Cairo meetings have not resolved the central disagreement.
Hamas is seeking a political future and wants guarantees before giving up its weapons. Washington and Israel are seeking to dismantle its military structure before allowing it a meaningful role in the post-war order.
The three analysts differ in emphasis, but their assessments point to the same broader problem: Hamas may still be calculating that time and political change can preserve its position, while the conditions being set by Israel and the United States are designed to prevent a return to the pre-war status quo.
The Kushner-Hayya meeting therefore represents an important channel of communication, but not a breakthrough.
The question now is whether Cairo can generate sufficient momentum on both sides to keep the ceasefire process alive or whether the dispute over Hamas’s future will prevent the negotiations from reaching their next stage.
Sally Ibrahim is The New Arab’s correspondent from Gaza
