US-Hamas channel has value, but only if terrorists disappear from Gaza’s future - editorial

Direct talks between Washington and Hamas hold strategic value, but their ultimate success hinges on the complete disarmament of the terrorist organization and its permanent removal from Gaza's future. This sentiment underscores the core of the ongoing diplomatic efforts aimed at resolving the conflict.

A high-level American delegation, spearheaded by Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and a key architect of his Middle East policy, met with Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya in Egypt. The objective was to advance the administration's Gaza plan and bridge significant gaps concerning Hamas's disarmament, Israel's withdrawal from the territory, and the future governance of Gaza. Kushner, accompanied by figures like former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Board of Peace Director-General Nickolay Mladenov, conveyed to Hamas that mere statements about demilitarization were insufficient, with Washington expecting concrete, verifiable steps.

Hamas, in response, affirmed its commitment to the American framework but simultaneously demanded that Israel fulfill its obligations. This stance was echoed by eight Arab and Muslim countries, which later criticized Israel for rejecting the latest roadmap. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has consistently maintained that Hamas must be fully disarmed, and Israel cannot withdraw while the organization retains the capacity to rebuild its military strength. The routine nature of these high-level meetings, once a source of uproar, now highlights the persistent, albeit complex, diplomatic engagement.

Earlier instances of direct contact, such as US hostage envoy Adam Boehler's meetings with Hamas officials in March 2025, had caused significant consternation in Jerusalem, with Israel expressing its objections. Boehler, however, defended these contacts, asserting the United States' independent interests and the potential for direct engagement to secure hostage releases. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had then described the initiative as a "one-off situation," indicating the sensitive nature of such diplomatic overtures.

“

We’re the United States. We’re not an agent of Israel.