۲ Hamas red line in response to Trump; Israeli Departure and Resistance Resistance – Mehr News Agency | Iranian and world news

Mehr News Agency, International Group, Elnaz Rahmat Nejad: The US president’s proposal to end the Gaza war was unveiled after Donald Trump’s meeting with the Zionist Prime Minister at the White House. The plan has stated that the occupying regime of Quds will not occupy Gaza. The foreign ministers of the Arab and Islamic countries, including Turkey, Jordan, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, who had met with Donald Trump on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, issued a joint statement in response to the announcement of Trump’s two -material plan claiming to end the war.

The foreign ministers of these countries emphasized their readiness to cooperate with the United States and the relevant parties to finalize and implement the agreement, ensure security and stability for the people of the region. The claims of the two Arab and Islamic countries welcomed Donald Trump’s plan for a ceasefire in Gaza are raised in a situation where the plan is to provide no clear strategies for the Gaza Regulation and Tunisia, except for guarantees and deadlines on the release of Zionist prisoners and the disarmament of their resistance and their tunnels.

The Hamas movement accepted some of the key parts of the Trump plan, such as the end of the war, the release of Zionist prisoners and the Palestinian detainees, but called for an explanation and amendment of several ambiguous clauses such as Israel’s retreat from Gaza and the disarmament of Hamas. Hamas also announced that it is ready to launch urgent talks through the mediators to discuss further details.

In the same way with Nasser Abu Avsif, representative of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad Movement in Iran Talked to the conversation that Detailed Read it below;

How do you evaluate Hamas’s response to “Trump’s 2 -material plan for Gaza”?

Hamas’s response to Trump’s plan for Gaza is “minor conditional acceptance”. Hamas has announced his accompaniment with the immediate ceasefire, the full exchange of Zionist and Palestinian prisoners, the expansion of humanitarian aid to Gaza and the transfer of the Gaza Executive Directorate to a Palestinian technocratic government with regional support. Instead, Hamas has insisted on the two red positions; The complete departure of the Zionist forces (not the stage exit) and the non -commitment to disarm the resistance as a prerequisite.

Exactly what clauses of the Trump plan have a positive response and which clauses faced Hamas’s negative response?

Immediate ceasefire clauses and reduction of field operations, comprehensive exchange of all Zionist prisoners (alive and bodies) against the widespread release of Palestinian prisoners, which is an operational indicator in the US proposed text, were accepted. Also, a four -hour deadline for returning all Zionist prisoners after the official announcement of the occupation army, the opening of aid corridors and the mass entry of aid to Gaza, the beginning of transitional governance, meaning the daily administration of Gaza to Palestinian technocrats was met with a positive response.

The disarmament of Gaza’s civilian, “amnesty” or “safe departure” to the delivery of weapons, the political removal of Hamas from the future of Gaza, and the step departure of the Zionist regime, led to a negative response from Hamas. Hamas’s position is in the case of the full and immediate departure of the occupation army from Gaza.

What are the probable scenarios after this project is submitted?

The limited executive ceasefire is a possible short -term scenario. This scenario includes aid to Gaza and a significant reduction in military operations. It is expected to begin the exchange rate under the supervision of the captives. The disarmament cases of the resistance and the final departure of the Zionist forces will be postponed to further negotiations.

A quick stalemate and a return to intensification of conflict can be the third possible scenario. If each party stays on its demands (immediate disarmament against complete immediate departure) or field violations occur from the beginning, the risk of collapse will increase.

Given the opposite side, can we hope for a ceasefire in Gaza?

Yes, but with serious caution. Signs of hope such as the existence of a public political deadline, the acceptance of key elements by Hamas (transitional exchange/transitional governing), direct US entry to stop attacks and promote exchanges, and active regional mediation; All of this enhances the chance of a renewable temporary ceasefire.

Fragile agents, such as structural disputes over disarmament and the speed of the Gaza occupation forces and the possibility of field violations, are also found, so in the near horizon, the possibility of a short -term ceasefire is much greater than the rapid final agreement.