By: Fern Sidman- Jewish Voice News

In remarks that underscored both his government’s hardened strategic posture and the accelerating geopolitical realignment surrounding Gaza, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Knesset lawmakers on Monday that Hamas will be compelled to disarm “either the easy way or the hard way,” flatly rejecting the terror organization’s latest repudiation of American and international demands for demilitarization. The declaration—issued during a mandatory 40-signature parliamentary debate—signaled what The Jewish News Syndicate (JNS) described in their report as a “pivotal turning point” in the battle over who ultimately governs, secures, and stabilizes the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu’s comments came less than 24 hours after Hamas political chief Khaled Mashaal, beaming in via pre-recorded video to a conference in Istanbul, defiantly renounced President Donald Trump’s U.S.- and U.N.-backed stipulation that the Gaza Strip be fully demilitarized as a condition for the ceasefire agreement negotiated this autumn. According to the information provided in the JNS report, Mashaal used the platform to extol Hamas’s “resistance project” and to proclaim that its weapons constitute the “honor and pride of the ummah,” a formulation designed to anchor Hamas’s arsenal in a pan-Islamic moral framework rather than a militant arsenal responsible for the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.

Netanyahu, standing at the Knesset podium, used the moment to present both a rebuttal and an ultimatum. “How did Khaled Mashaal put it yesterday? ‘We will continue on our path and we will not disarm,’” he said, quoting the Hamas leader with frigid precision. “But we—and I commit to you—will not allow Hamas murderers to rearm and threaten us again. We are acting every day to prevent this, and this mission will be completed either the easy way or the hard way.”

The JNS report noted that the prime minister rarely speaks in such binary, uncompromising terms in parliamentary settings, emphasizing that his rhetoric reflected a broader shift within Israel’s national security establishment. With the first phase of Trump’s 20-point Gaza plan nearing completion, Netanyahu declared that the country is now “focusing on the next mission: disarming Hamas and demilitarizing the Gaza Strip.”

Mashaal’s Istanbul address directly repudiated the architecture of the Trump plan, which was endorsed overwhelmingly by the U.N. Security Council on November 17 and designed to phase Gaza from ceasefire to stabilization, and ultimately into a post-Hamas governance structure. According to the JNS report, the plan requires Hamas to surrender its weapons, allow demilitarization by an International Stabilization Force, and accept the supervision of a “Board of Peace” that would temporarily administer civic life in the coastal enclave.

Mashaal rejected all of it.

“Protecting the resistance project and its weapons is the right of our people to defend themselves,” he proclaimed. “A thousand statements are not worth a single projectile of iron.”

His denunciation extended beyond disarmament. He dismissed “all forms of guardianship, mandate and re-occupation of the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and all of Palestine,” indirectly labeling the proposed transitional administration as illegitimate. He framed Gaza’s future as part of a maximalist nationalist and Islamist project: a vision of “liberating Jerusalem,” “cleansing Al-Aqsa Mosque,” and “reclaiming Islamic and Christian holy sites”—language, the JNS report observed, intended not merely to signal defiance but to reaffirm the ideological infrastructure that animates Hamas’s most uncompromising currents.

In statements to JNS on Sunday, a U.S. State Department spokesperson made clear that the United States considers Hamas bound to the agreement it entered. Washington’s position is unambiguous: “Hamas has agreed to all 20 points of President Trump’s 20-Point Plan. That means Gaza will be fully demilitarized for the sake of Gazans.”

The spokesperson stressed that demilitarization is not merely an Israeli demand but a condition for international reconstruction, humanitarian stabilization, and the security guarantees built into the ceasefire deal itself.

The contradiction between Hamas’s formal commitments and Mashaal’s fiery posture is what Netanyahu described as a pattern of “constant violation” of the U.S.-brokered truce. His remarks suggested that Israel sees Hamas’s delay tactics—specifically regarding hostage returns—as part of a broader strategy to stall demilitarization.

Netanyahu drew attention to the fact that Israel’s operational commitments are not merely strategic but deeply moral. At the center of his remarks was the case of Master Sgt. Ran Gvili, a member of the Israel Police’s elite Yasam unit, who fought terrorists during the October 7, 2023 massacre and whose body was abducted into Gaza. Gvili remains the final Israeli captive held in the enclave—his remains unreturned for 794 days, in violation of the ceasefire agreement.

Under the U.S.-brokered deal that took effect on October 10, Hamas pledged to return the remains of 28 victims held in Gaza. The JNS report noted that while the group returned some bodies, the pace slowed dramatically as the process neared completion—corresponding to the phase when disarmament is scheduled to begin under the supervision of Trump’s proposed International Stabilization Force.

Netanyahu vowed that Israel’s “sacred mission” to return Gvili’s remains “for burial in the land of his forefathers” would not be obstructed by Hamas’s political maneuvering. That mission, he said, is inseparable from the broader requirement that Gaza be stripped of its capacity to threaten Israel ever again.

The confrontation between Netanyahu’s position and Mashaal’s is not merely rhetorical. It reflects opposing visions for the future of Gaza—and, by extension, the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations.

Israel’s Vision, as presented to the Knesset and summarized in the JNS report rests on three pillars which include a permanent end to Hamas’s military capability, external enforcement by international partners, led by the United States and the construction of a post-Hamas civic order—neither Israeli occupation nor Hamas rule.

Hamas’s Vision, articulated by Mashaal, is radically different. This includes the preservation of the “resistance project,” including weapons, operational networks, and militant ideology, the rejection of any foreign guarantors or supervisors, whether American, Arab, or international and the reassertion of maximalist territorial claims over all of “historic Palestine,” not merely Gaza.

Mashaal’s speech, as the JNS report noted, was laced with triumphalism—hinging on the belief that global anti-Israel sentiment and political polarization in the West are creating new opportunities to delegitimize Israel. He pointed to what he called an “international stage increasingly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause,” interpreting the post-October 7 upheaval as evidence that Israel’s diplomatic position has weakened.

Addressing the Knesset, Netanyahu sought to reassure Israelis that the government is not merely responding to Hamas’s rhetoric but charting a disciplined operational course. His remarks framed the conflict as entering a decisive second phase—one that requires both international coordination and unflinching Israeli resolve.

His message was aimed at multiple audiences:

To Israelis: that their government will not permit Gaza to return to the conditions that enabled October 7.

To the United States: that Israel fully intends to implement the Trump plan, including the demilitarization provisions Washington considers essential.

To Hamas: that time is running out, and that continued defiance will provoke actions far more consequential than speeches.

As JNS emphasized in its coverage, the standoff between Netanyahu’s ultimatum and Mashaal’s defiance will shape not just the future of Gaza but the strategic architecture of the region. The demilitarization requirement is the hinge upon which everything now turns—reconstruction aid, international security guarantees, the role of Arab mediators, and the very viability of the Trump-brokered plan.

Mashaal’s vows of perpetual resistance are not merely symbolic. They are designed to test international commitment, probe for diplomatic fractures, and harden the ideological spine of Hamas’s global network.

Netanyahu, in contrast, is asserting that Israel has reached the end of its strategic patience. The message is unmistakable: disarmament will happen—and if Hamas refuses to carry it out voluntarily, Israel will do it unilaterally.

The gap between Hamas’s maximalist ambitions and Israel’s insistence on demilitarization has never been wider. As JNS reported, the next phase of the conflict is already underway—not through rockets or ground incursions, but through a diplomatic and strategic contest over who will define Gaza’s future.

In this confrontation, Netanyahu’s vow reverberates as both warning and prophecy: Hamas will be disarmed—“either the easy way or the hard way.”