Hamas intends to hand over civilian rule in the Gaza Strip, but not its weapons. And that is the main obstacle to the peace process. What does Hamas's intention mean then: a real chance or symbolism?
How serious are Hamas' intentions? Earlier this week, the group that controls the Gaza Strip announced its plans to dissolve its government and hand over the administration to a transitional body made up of experts. According to it, the move is intended to pave the way for the National Committee for the Governance of Gaza (NCAG), which is to take over the responsibilities of the civilian administration under a peace plan brokered by the United States.
The question now is whether this announcement truly marks a political turning point or is it merely symbolic. Israel immediately reacted with skepticism. Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said that as long as Hamas, designated a terrorist organization by Germany, the European Union, the United States and others, retains its weapons, any civilian government will ultimately act according to its instructions. The complete disarmament of Hamas and the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip remain prerequisites for any political restructuring.
Not just symbolism, but not a relinquishment
Many observers see the move as neither a purely symbolic gesture nor a genuine relinquishment of power, but rather an attempt to give new impetus to a political process that has been stalled for months, with no commitment to disarmament yet.
Last year, the US peace plan called for a new administration made up of independent technocrats. Earlier this year, the National Committee for the Governance of Gaza (NCAG) – a transitional body consisting of Palestinian experts. Its members, however, are still in Cairo and are waiting for permission to enter Gaza.
For Islamic scholar Simon Wolfgang Fuchs, a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, the decisive factor is not so much the formal dissolution of the Hamas government as the political message it sends. With its unusually restrained behavior, Hamas wants to send a signal that the political process should not fail because of it, Fuchs said in an interview with DW. The organization seems to have consciously abandoned any belligerent postures and wants to create the impression that it adheres to the American peace plan and is ready to move it forward.
Expert: An attempt to set the transition to peace in motion
According to the compromise reached, the technocratic transitional administration was to begin work, and Israel - to gradually withdraw its troops from the Gaza Strip. "In fact, the opposite has happened," says Fuchs. Israel now controls more of the Gaza Strip than it did a few months ago. That's why he sees Hamas' announcement as an attempt "to break the blockade and get the political process moving again." Other observers have made similar arguments. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a think tank, says that transferring civilian rule to a technocratic transitional government has been part of the US peace plan from the start. The Guardian newspaper quotes Middle East experts Max Rodenbeck and Muhammad Shehada as saying that Hamas wants to deprive Israel of the argument that Gaza's reconstruction is failing because of its rule, while at the same time increasing political pressure on Israel and the US. According to them, it is no longer a question of who rules Gaza, but of the conditions under which reconstruction can begin.
However, serious doubts remain, since Hamas has announced its readiness to hand over civilian rule, but not its weapons. And this is the main obstacle to the peace process. Another think tank - Security Council Report, which supports discussions in the UN Security Council - recalls that the 15-point road map envisages that Hamas will give up all military, police and administrative functions, and that the transitional administration will be taken over entirely by a technocratic body.
According to the road map developed by the Peace Council, the disarmament of Hamas and the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces should take place in parallel. The assessment of the Security Council Report is that so far all these interrelated steps have stalled and thus blocked the transition process.
Transfer of power without practical consequences
Simon Fuchs also sees the military issue as a decisive criterion. On the one hand, there are signs that Washington is currently more keen to promote the establishment of a civilian administration than the immediate disarmament of Hamas. On the other hand, this is precisely what explains Israeli skepticism. "There is a fear that Hamas, while talking about civilian structures, is putting off the military dimension indefinitely," he says.
Added to this is the fact that the announced transfer of power has so far been followed by almost no practical steps. "For now, the dissolution of the administration is mainly symbolic," says Fuchs.
The members of the transitional government are still outside the Gaza Strip, there is a lack of funds, personnel and security forces, and the international stabilization force currently exists only on paper. It seems that the ministries will continue to operate. "For now, everything remains as before," Fuchs summarizes.
The Jerusalem Post“ points to another possible scenario: Hamas could dissolve its government and step down from direct responsibility, but retain its influence behind the scenes. The crucial question, then, is whether the organization will actually give up power or simply change its role.
Open questions
The question remains whether Hamas's statement will actually lead to a political breakthrough. It could move the stalled process forward, but it will not resolve the conflict. As long as the transitional administration cannot begin its work and there is no progress on security, disarmament or reconstruction, this step is likely to remain primarily one thing: a political signal with an unclear outcome.