Ceasefire talks in Egypt between Palestinian factions and mediators face a serious test after Nickolay Mladenov, the high representative of the “Board of Peace“, demanded that not a “single bullet” should be left in Gaza.
Among the maximalist demands of US President Donald Trump’s oversight body for Gaza is the complete disarmament of Hamas, the surrender of maps of tunnels operated by the group, and even weapons privately held by Palestinians in the enclave.
Details from sources involved in the Cairo talks say that the handover of Palestinian weapons is the primary hurdle to completely ending Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.
Palestinian officials argue that the complete disarmament stipulation means that Mladenov is essentially a facilitator for Israel’s maximalist demands.
At the heart of the current deadlock is “Clause 8”, a pivotal section of the United States-brokered October 2025 ceasefire plan, which dictates the exact terms of disarmament, the management of military infrastructure in post-war Gaza, as well as the transfer of security responsibilities for the enclave to a unified Palestinian body.
An informed source familiar with the internal dynamics of the talks told Al Jazeera that Hamas initially demonstrated “high positivity” regarding this clause.
For the first time, Hamas had agreed to the handover of its “inventory and storage of heavy weapons”, referring to the arsenal of rockets, missiles, and Kornet antitank missiles that the movement is believed to possess.
“The mediators were, of course, happy because for the first time Hamas engaged with this matter,” the informed source said. “Previously, they would not engage in this topic at all.”
A Hamas source involved in the talks provided Al Jazeera with the competing drafts of Clause 8 of the ceasefire plan, which covers the handover of weapons by Palestinian factions in Gaza.
Mladenov, who, as high representative, has responsibility for post-war transition in Gaza, wants the unconditional surrender of all arms by Palestinian armed groups in Gaza.
Hamas and Palestinian factions, meanwhile, have tied the handover of weapons to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.
The high representative’s proposed text:
Hamas and the Palestinian factions’ final text:
When Mladenov presented the amended Palestinian text to the Israelis, they outright rejected it. They then countered with a new demand of their own: The dismantling of the entire tunnel network operated by the Qassam Brigades, Hamas’s armed wing, and that all facilities belonging to the armed group should be dismantled.
When Hamas refused, Mladenov aligned with the Israeli position. “He said: ‘No, we will not accept, and you must bring everything. You must hand over tunnel maps, manufacturing workshops, heavy weapons, and light weapons,'” the informed source quoted Mladenov as saying.
Another senior Hamas official confirmed to Al Jazeera that the talks had not collapsed, but the demand for Hamas’s complete disarmament was severely testing the negotiations.
“Mladenov stressed that Gaza will be completely free of any weapons, down to the single bullet,” the Hamas official said. “No factions, no families, no militias, not even individuals.”
Another source from a Palestinian faction participating in the Cairo talks provided details about how the talks had moved towards the current standoff.
After meeting for four consecutive days starting June 9, Palestinian factions agreed on June 12 to a unified modification of Clause 8, offering to inventory and storage for heavy weapons. Mladenov met Hamas representatives four days later to discuss the framework.
Mladenov initially expressed “discomfort” with the Palestinian amendments, and subsequently introduced sweeping new modifications based on his 15-point roadmap for peace between Hamas and Israel. This included a demand for dismantling Hamas and other Palestinian factions’ military capabilities in Gaza, including “weapons storage facilities, tunnels, and workshops”.
Mladenov’s framework reiterated his demand that all personal weapons belonging to Palestinians in Gaza be handed over.
The plan would see all rifles and other firearms be surrendered to the NCAG, which would manage them through a strict “purchase or licensing” scheme.
Mladenov formally submitted this document on June 17, and it is currently being reviewed by all factions. “There will certainly be a comprehensive meeting for all forces to reach a joint formulation and present it once again to Mladenov,” a Palestinian source involved in the talks told Al Jazeera. “The door is not closed.”
The push for total disarmament has been squarely rejected by all Palestinian leaders, who view the disarmament demand as a way of subverting the peace process in Gaza.
Mohammad al-Braim, the media official for the Popular Resistance Committees – one of the key factions officially attending the Cairo talks – told Al Jazeera that the groups have shown “unparalleled flexibility” regarding weapons arrangements.
“We will not raise the white flag, and we will not submit under any threat, pressure, or procrastination,” al-Braim, also known as Abu Mujahid, said.
He accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Mladenov of trying to turn the weapons file into a “gateway to control all tracks”, stressing that any disarmament steps must be linked to a comprehensive political solution and a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. “This matter will not be for free,” he added.
Mladenov’s pivot has drawn scathing criticism from Palestinian observers of the process.
Saeed Ziad, a Palestinian political analyst, told Al Jazeera that the factions’ initial offer was strictly about “rearranging the resistance’s weapons”. This aligns with earlier statements from Hamas officials that weapons would no longer be visible on Gaza’s streets, but that some would be kept in reserve by armed groups.
“There is no discussion of disarmament or dissolving military formations except when a fully integrated Palestinian state is established,” Ziad said.
He said that no Palestinian leader or group has the authority to unilaterally end the resistance to the Israeli occupation and accused Mladenov of abandoning his neutrality.
“Mladenov does not act as a mediator, nor as an entity that wants to bring peace to the region,” Ziad argued. “He acts as an entity that sponsors and implements what the Israelis want. He is an employee of Netanyahu attempting to achieve personal gains.”
The demand for Hamas’s total disarmament is viewed by Palestinians as a pretext for Israel to avoid their previous commitments, he said.
Israel has so far failed to implement any of its commitments for Phase 1 of the October ceasefire agreement with Hamas. Instead of withdrawing from Gaza – as they were obliged to – the Israeli military has instead expanded its footprint in the enclave. Meanwhile, over a thousand Palestinians are believed to have been killed since the truce was proposed.
“What Mladenov proposes is extremely dangerous,” Ziad warned. “He proposes the vision of the extreme messianic Israeli right, the vision of [Finance Minister Bezalel] Smotrich and [National Security Minister Itamar] Ben-Gvir … he is precisely proposing the reinstatement of settlements in the Gaza Strip.”
Responding to an Al Jazeera request for comment regarding the allegations of bias and the scope of the disarmament demands, a Board of Peace official dismissed the criticism and defended Mladenov’s ongoing mediation efforts.
“Claims that the high representative is advancing the position of any particular party are inaccurate,” the official told Al Jazeera. “The framework is the product of extensive engagement among the parties and mediators – Egypt, Qatar, and Turkiye, aimed at reconciling legitimate concerns raised by all sides.”
The official emphasised that the roadmap “should not be understood as the proposal of any single individual or institution”, adding that Mladenov’s role is to “bridge differences and support efforts to reach practical arrangements that can be implemented on the ground”.
Addressing the Palestinian factions’ concerns that the disarmament demands were derailing the broader agreement, the official stated that the discussions are not centred “on any single provision or security measure”, but rather form part of a comprehensive package based on a reciprocal approach.
“It does not place obligations on one side alone, nor does it view any single component in isolation,” the official said. “Progress across security, governance, humanitarian access, reconstruction, and withdrawal arrangements is intended to advance through coordinated and mutually reinforcing steps by all parties.”
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。