The United States and Israel have been working on a framework for a post-war administration in Gaza, but a recent move by Hamas has sparked controversy and raised questions about the group's intentions.
Hamas announced that it is dissolving the emergency committee overseeing Gaza's civilian government, a move that could clear the way for a new U.S.-backed administration to take over civilian affairs.
The proposed body, known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), is a U.S.-backed committee intended to oversee civilian affairs in Gaza after the war.
Hamas has ruled Gaza since seizing control of the territory in 2007, and the group led the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel that triggered the war.
Israel has insisted that Hamas can have no governing or military role in post-war Gaza, and the announcement has become a key test of President Trump’s Gaza framework and broader regional diplomacy.
A genuine transfer of power could help advance the establishment of a post-war administration, but critics say Hamas is offering to relinquish the burdens of civilian government while retaining its weapons, security apparatus, and real influence on the ground.
The technocratic committee, which is currently based outside Gaza, has said it is prepared to begin operating once conditions allow, but the announcement did not include a commitment by Hamas to disarm, the central demand from Israel and a core element of Trump’s post-war framework.
Gazan teacher and political activist Alaa Abo Naddi said that the committee Hamas is dissolving was never the source of its real authority, and that the group is simply trying to buy time.
"The real question has always been whether Hamas is willing to give up its weapons and dismantle the armed groups and militias under its control," Abo Naddi said.
Gazan editor-in-chief Hadeel Oueis described the announcement as a "performative step" likely encouraged by one of Hamas’ regional backers.
Oueis said the move appeared intended to send Trump a message that Hamas had fulfilled its obligations and that Israel was now responsible for blocking the next phase of his plan.
Michael Milshtein, head of the Palestinian Studies Forum at Tel Aviv University’s Moshe Dayan Center, also characterized the dissolution as largely symbolic but said its timing could signal a broader diplomatic effort.
Milshtein said Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey have been working with Hamas to develop a compromise that could move the stalled post-war arrangement forward, particularly on the issue of disarmament.
Rather than demanding the immediate and complete surrender of Hamas’ weapons, he said the mediators may be pushing for a gradual and partial process that Hamas could accept.
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar rejected that distinction, accusing Hamas of trying to reproduce the model used by Hezbollah in Lebanon, where an armed organization maintains military dominance while civilian institutions handle government services.
Sa’ar said Israel would continue to insist on the "disarmament of Hamas and all other terrorist organizations in the Gaza Strip, and its full demilitarization."
The United Nations also offered a cautiously positive response, welcoming any step that contributes to the implementation of the ceasefire agreement and advances the objectives reflected in relevant Security Council resolutions.
The real test, Milshtein said, will be whether the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza is allowed to enter Gaza, operate independently, and exercise genuine authority, while Hamas gives up not only its civilian role but also its security and military control.
