Analysts warn that entrenched ideological positions within Hamas could endanger President Trump’s recently announced Israel-Hamas peace deal, prompting debate over whether sustainable peace is achievable when one party remains ideologically opposed to compromise.
Story Snapshot
- Trump brokered a landmark peace deal between Israel and Hamas, ending two years of devastating war.
- The persistence of jihadi ideology in Hamas remains the major roadblock to lasting peace and regional stability.
- The agreement includes a ceasefire, hostage release, Israeli withdrawal, and humanitarian aid, but ideological opposition threatens its durability.
- Conservative analysts warn that without addressing Hamas’s core beliefs, the deal may only provide temporary relief.
Trump’s Peace Deal: An Unprecedented Breakthrough
Following his re-election, President Donald Trump announced a direct peace agreement between Israel and Hamas — a breakthrough some analysts, including Aaron David Miller of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, described as an unprecedented diplomatic development. This deal came after years of conflict that began with Hamas’s brutal October 7, 2023, attack on Israel and continued through failed negotiations and mounting casualties on both sides. Trump’s 21-point plan, announced in September 2025, received cautious support from several Arab and Muslim nations that served as mediators, including Qatar and Egypt, according to coverage by Axios and El País. The agreement’s initial terms included a ceasefire, the release of hostages, a phased withdrawal of Israeli troops, and a significant ramp-up in humanitarian assistance to the war-torn Gaza Strip.
Despite international attention, Trump’s peace initiative faces a critical obstacle — the enduring ideological stance of Hamas’s leadership, which continues to reject Israel’s legitimacy, according to political analyst Ehud Yaari of Washington Institute. This ideology, rooted in the group’s founding charter, categorically rejects the legitimacy of Israel and opposes any negotiated settlement as a betrayal of religious and nationalist principles. Historical precedents, like the collapse of the Oslo Accords and repeated breakdowns in previous ceasefires, illustrate how deeply ideological opposition can sabotage diplomatic progress, regardless of the terms on offer. The current agreement, while robust on paper, is thus plagued by skepticism among experts who cite Hamas’s longstanding refusal to compromise as a reason for caution.
Stakeholders and Regional Dynamics: Who Holds the Keys?
The primary players in this historic agreement include President Trump as chief mediator, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the leadership of Hamas. Trump’s envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, alongside international figures like Tony Blair, played instrumental roles in crafting the deal and securing regional buy-in. Meanwhile, countries like Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey acted as critical intermediaries, leveraging their influence to bring both parties to the negotiating table. The Palestinian Authority, notably excluded from Gaza’s governance under the deal, remains sidelined per Israel’s insistence, further complicating the regional political landscape. The dynamics among these actors are shaped by diverging goals: Trump seeks legacy and stability, Netanyahu wants security and political survival, and Hamas aims to maintain ideological purity while surviving militarily and politically.
For Israel, the agreement promises the return of hostages and the prospect of reduced international isolation. For Gaza’s population, the deal offers hope for respite from violence and increased humanitarian aid. However, the exclusion of the Palestinian Authority and the unresolved question of future governance in Gaza introduce significant uncertainties. While Arab states see an opportunity for regional influence and humanitarian relief, the international community remains watchful, wary that any ideological resurgence could reignite conflict.
Unpacking the Ideological Barrier: Why Jihadi Doctrine Endures
Analysts across the political spectrum agree that jihadi ideology is the single greatest threat to the peace deal’s longevity. Hamas’s doctrine frames the conflict as a religious obligation, making compromise with Israel not only politically risky but theologically unacceptable. Security experts, such as Michael Milshtein of Reichman University, emphasize that the peace process depends on Hamas’s willingness to revise or reinterpret its founding principles, including its long-standing opposition to Israel’s legitimacy. Previous attempts at reconciliation, including the Oslo Accords and the Trump-era Abraham Accords, foundered on similar ideological divides. Inside Israel, society remains divided over the terms of the deal, with concerns about long-term security and political legitimacy swirling around both the Netanyahu government and Hamas itself.
Optimists describe the deal as an opportunity for a new era in the Middle East, contingent upon continued U.S. engagement and the willingness of regional actors to enforce compliance. Skeptics caution that unless Hamas’s underlying ideological framework changes, the ceasefire’s stability may be temporary, according to Middle East policy scholar Dr. Yossi Mekelberg of Chatham House. This ideological challenge also complicates efforts to rebuild Gaza, reconcile Palestinian factions, and stabilize broader regional alliances. Ultimately, the durability of Trump’s diplomatic achievement hinges not just on political agreements, but on the far more difficult task of ideological change within Hamas and its supporters.
Implementation, Uncertainties, and the Road Ahead
As the peace agreement enters its first phase, the immediate cessation of hostilities and release of hostages mark significant victories for both Israeli and Palestinian civilians. Humanitarian aid is flowing into Gaza, and Israeli forces are conducting a phased withdrawal. However, crucial elements remain unresolved: Hamas’s willingness to disarm, international oversight of Gaza’s new technocratic administration, and the risk that hardline elements could undermine the process from within. The rapid timeline of negotiations and the lack of long-term enforcement guarantees are fueling ongoing debates among analysts and policymakers. For Americans concerned about the erosion of constitutional values and the dangers of unchecked government power, the situation serves as a reminder that lasting peace depends not just on strong leadership, but on confronting extremist ideologies head-on.
https://twitter.com/RealMarkLevin/status/1712180043750107299
In the short term, Trump’s deal has provided a desperately needed pause in violence and opened the door for humanitarian relief. Long-term success, however, will require vigilance against the ideological forces that have repeatedly derailed peace efforts in the past. Commentators from conservative outlets, such as The Daily Signal, argue that enduring peace will depend on confronting militant ideologies that have historically undermined regional security.
Sources:
Trump brokers Israel-Hamas peace deal: Axios
Breaking: Trump Announces Israel-Hamas Deal Reached — The Daily Signal
Israel and Hamas agree to first phase of peace plan, Trump says — Defense News
Israel and Hamas reach deal on first phase of Trump’s peace plan for Gaza — El País