The United States must move beyond rhetoric about Hamas’s “bad faith” and offer incentives—such as aid packages or sanctions relief—to bolster moderate Palestinian voices.
( Foreign Policy in Focus ) – In Gaza, where hunger gnaws at children and rubble buries hope, the Arab League issued a rare, unified declaration in late July 2025: “Hamas must end its rule in Gaza.” Is this a historic turning point or a fleeting cry in a region choked by conflict?
This unprecedented call, co-signed at a United Nations conference by the European Union and 17 other countries, demands that Hamas disarm and cede power to the Palestinian Authority (PA) to pave the way for a two-state solution. This bold move could either break the cycle of violence in Gaza or dissolve into yet another hollow gesture in a region scarred by unfulfilled promises. As the Israel-Palestine conflict grinds on, with over 61,000 Palestinian deaths reported since October 2023, the League’s statement demands rigorous scrutiny. Is this a courageous pivot toward peace, or a diplomatic mirage masking regional rivalries and external pressures?
The declaration marks a seismic shift in Arab rhetoric. For the first time, key players like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt have publicly condemned Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel, which killed 1,200 people and took 250 hostages, and demanded the group’s exclusion from Gaza’s governance. This is no small thing. The Arab League has historically tiptoed around direct criticism of Palestinian factions, wary of alienating constituencies that view Hamas as a symbol of resistance. The call for Hamas to hand over its weapons to the PA, coupled with a proposal for a “temporary international stabilization mission” under UN auspices, signals a pragmatic turn, prioritizing stability over ideological loyalty. France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot hailed it as “historic and unprecedented,” noting that it also expresses Arab intent to normalize relations with Israel, a prospect that seemed unthinkable a decade ago.
Critics, however, argue that the statement aligns too closely with U.S. and Israeli interests, particularly given Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s rejection of a two-state solution and his insistence on eradicating Hamas as a military threat. Both Israel and the United States boycotted the UN conference, with Israel’s UN Ambassador Danny Danon dismissing it as appeasement of “terrorists and extremist forces.”
Does the Arab League’s stance, then, inadvertently bolster Israel’s narrative, risking alienation of Palestinian supporters who see Hamas as a bulwark against occupation? The League’s condemnation of Israel’s “siege and starvation” tactics in Gaza, which have led to a humanitarian catastrophe, suggests an attempt to walk this tightrope. President Trump’s remarks—“Those children look very hungry”—have made this balancing act more difficult, exposing Western double standards and intensifying calls for accountability. But rhetoric alone won’t heal Gaza’s wounds.
The League’s unity is a patchwork stitched together by competing agendas. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, wary of Iran-backed Hamas, enthusiastically back the call, seeing it as a chance to curb Tehran’s influence. Qatar and Algeria, however, are more reticent, emphasizing Palestinian self-determination. Qatar’s longstanding ties to Hamas, as a mediator and host of its political leadership, complicate its position. Egypt, too, faces a dilemma: its March 2025 plan for Gaza’s reconstruction excluded Hamas from governance but avoided explicit calls for disarmament, reflecting Cairo’s delicate balancing act. A 2024 RAND report underscores how intra-Arab divisions have historically scuttled peace efforts, and this declaration risks faltering without enforceable commitments. The Arab League’s earlier March 2025 communique, which sidestepped Hamas’s role entirely, reveals the difficulty of forging consensus.
Photo by Mahmoud Ayad on Unsplash
Hamas’s response has been predictably defiant. Although welcoming elections and international support for Palestinian statehood, it rejected the call to disarm, insisting that “the Palestinian situation is an internal affair.” Senior official Mahmoud Mardawi told media that negotiations are futile while Gaza’s starvation crisis persists, a sentiment echoed by Hamas’s withdrawal from ceasefire talks in Doha last week. The group’s refusal to budge, coupled with Israel’s recent cabinet approval of a plan to take control of Gaza City and Netanyahu’s continued insistence on controlling “all of Gaza,” casts a long shadow over the League’s ambitions. The humanitarian crisis—exacerbated by Israel’s blockade, with over 100 aid organizations warning of “mass starvation”—further complicates the picture
For the Arab League’s declaration to transcend diplomatic posturing, it must be paired with action. First, the League must leverage its financial clout, particularly from Gulf states, to fund Gaza’s reconstruction, estimated by the World Bank to cost billions. Second, it must mediate a credible power transition, ensuring that the PA can govern effectively without being seen as a Western proxy. This may require exploring transitional governance models, such as a technocratic committee or unity government. This requires delicate diplomacy, given the PA’s own legitimacy crisis under Mahmoud Abbas. Third, the League must pressure Hamas diplomatically, perhaps through Qatar and Egypt, to relinquish its arsenal, possibly by offering reconstruction funds as leverage. The proposed UN stabilization mission, backed by troop contributions from some member states, could provide a neutral framework, but Hamas ally Islamic Jihad has already rejected it.
The West has a role to play, too. The United States, despite its absence from the UN conference, must move beyond rhetoric about Hamas’s “bad faith” and offer incentives—such as aid packages or sanctions relief—to bolster moderate Palestinian voices. Europe’s role is pivotal. France, Germany, Italy, and the UK, set to recognize a Palestinian state in September 2025 (with the UK’s support contingent on a ceasefire), have endorsed the Arab League’s $53 billion reconstruction plan. This looming recognition deadline adds urgency to the League’s efforts and could serve as a diplomatic lever to pressure both Hamas and Israel. Yet, the West’s selective outrage—condemning Hamas while soft-pedaling Israel’s actions—undermines its credibility.
The Arab League’s call is a gamble that could reshape the Israel-Palestine conflict or dissolve into irrelevance. Its success hinges on sustained unity, concrete action, and a willingness to confront uncomfortable realities—both Hamas’s intransigence and Israel’s obstructionism. Gaza’s people, trapped in a cycle of violence and starvation, deserve more than lofty declarations. With September’s recognition deadline fast approaching, the world is watching, and history will judge not by words, but by deeds.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved