Israel has rejected a 15-point US-backed proposal aimed at resolving the Gaza conflict, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu making clear that his government will not agree to an Israeli withdrawal until Hamas completely gives up its weapons.
Netanyahu delivered the message at Israel’s weekly Cabinet meeting on Sunday, according to Israeli media reports, drawing a firm line between any proposed diplomatic agreement and what he described as Israel’s core security requirements.
The Israeli prime minister said his government would continue to put national security first, even when that meant disagreeing with close allies. His comments came as uncertainty continued to surround the implementation of a ceasefire framework and the broader future of Gaza after the war.
Netanyahu also used the Cabinet meeting to reinforce his position on Iran, saying Israel would prevent Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons regardless of whether a diplomatic agreement is reached.
“With an agreement or without an agreement, as long as I am prime minister, Iran will not have nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu said, according to The Times of Israel.
His remarks underline the increasingly complex nature of Israel’s regional security calculations. While Gaza remains a central concern, Netanyahu is also closely watching developments involving Iran and Lebanon, where Israel has continued military operations.
Netanyahu Rejects Trump-Backed Gaza Proposal
The dispute over the Gaza proposal highlights a major difference between Washington’s diplomatic ambitions and the Israeli government’s conditions for ending the conflict.
US President Donald Trump has previously described his Gaza plan as a potential breakthrough in efforts to end the war. Under the proposed framework, Hamas would surrender its weapons and the conflict would move towards a longer-term political and security arrangement.
However, Netanyahu has now made clear that Israel will not accept a withdrawal unless Hamas is fully disarmed.
For the Israeli government, the issue goes beyond the question of territory. Hamas retained military capabilities after years of conflict, and the October 7, 2023, attack remains a defining factor in Israel’s security calculations.
Hamas had governed Gaza for nearly two decades before launching the October 7 attack on Israel. The assault triggered a devastating war that transformed the political and security landscape across the region.
Netanyahu argues that allowing Hamas to retain its weapons would leave Israel exposed to another attack.
His position therefore places disarmament at the centre of any potential agreement. Without that condition being met, an Israeli withdrawal appears unlikely under the current government’s stated policy.
Why Hamas Disarmament Remains Israel’s Key Demand
Netanyahu says Hamas still possesses the ability to launch attacks against Israel, despite the broader diplomatic efforts surrounding Gaza.
He argued that the absence of a major Hamas attack in recent weeks should not be interpreted as proof that the organisation no longer poses a threat.
“It may attack, but why have long weeks gone by without it attacking us? Because it knows what a powerful blow we will inflict on it if it does,” Netanyahu said.
The statement reflects the Israeli leadership’s broader argument that military deterrence remains necessary even during periods of reduced fighting.
For Israel, the central question is whether Hamas can remain an armed organisation while also participating in a future political arrangement for Gaza. Netanyahu’s answer has repeatedly been no.
That position could create a significant obstacle to any agreement requiring Israel to withdraw its forces before Hamas completes a disarmament process.
The challenge is also practical. Any plan that requires Hamas to surrender its weapons would need mechanisms to verify compliance and determine what happens if the group refuses or only partially complies.
Those questions could become critical if negotiations resume or if the Trump administration pushes the parties towards implementing the proposed framework.
Netanyahu Says Israel Will Stand Firm on Security
Alongside his rejection of the Gaza proposal, Netanyahu delivered a broader message about Israel’s approach to its allies.
He said Israel would not hesitate to defend its interests even when doing so created disagreements with friendly governments.
“We can and know how to stand our ground even against our very best friends when necessary,” he said.
The remarks appeared aimed not only at the Gaza negotiations but also at Israel’s wider regional strategy.
The United States remains Israel’s most important international ally, providing extensive diplomatic and military support. Trump and Netanyahu have also publicly emphasised their close relationship.
Nevertheless, the Gaza dispute demonstrates that a close alliance does not automatically translate into identical policy positions.
For Netanyahu, any agreement must address Israel’s long-term security concerns. For Washington, the challenge is finding a framework that can end the conflict, reduce violence and create conditions for a more stable Gaza.
Those objectives overlap in some areas but diverge sharply over the question of Hamas and the timetable for an Israeli military withdrawal.
Trump-Netanyahu Partnership Remains Intact
Despite rejecting the Gaza proposal, Netanyahu continued to praise Trump and the broader US-Israel relationship.
The Israeli leader described Trump as a “great friend” and credited the US president with supporting Israel in confronting Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
“I have great appreciation for President Trump. He is a great friend of ours in the White House,” Netanyahu said.
He also praised what he called the historic partnership between Israel and the United States in dealing with Iran.
Netanyahu’s comments suggest that his rejection of the Gaza proposal should not necessarily be interpreted as a breakdown in relations with Trump.
Instead, the Israeli prime minister appears to be drawing a distinction between cooperation with Washington and Israel’s willingness to accept specific diplomatic proposals.
That distinction could become increasingly important if the Trump administration seeks to revive negotiations over Gaza.
Trump has previously presented his Gaza initiative as a route towards ending the conflict. However, the Israeli government’s insistence on complete Hamas disarmament could make implementation considerably more difficult.
Israel Signals Tougher Position on Lebanon
Netanyahu also addressed developments on Israel’s northern front, saying Israeli forces had recently conducted military operations in Lebanon.
He referred to operations in areas including the Ali al-Taher ridge and said Israeli forces had eliminated militants.
“We are engaged in a very important operation. We are acting with sound judgment and wisdom,” Netanyahu said, without providing extensive operational details.
His remarks indicate that Israel’s security strategy extends beyond Gaza.
The country faces threats on multiple fronts, including armed groups operating from Lebanon and the wider regional influence of Iran.
Netanyahu stressed that the safety of Israeli citizens would not become a bargaining chip.
“The security of all Israel’s citizens is not up for negotiation. We stand firm on these interests,” he said.
The statement reinforces a recurring theme in Netanyahu’s recent public messaging: diplomatic agreements will not override what his government considers essential security requirements.
Iran Adds Another Layer to the Crisis
The prime minister’s comments about Iran may prove just as significant as his rejection of the Gaza proposal.
Netanyahu has long argued that Iran must not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. On Sunday, he repeated that commitment without linking it to the outcome of any diplomatic negotiations.
His statement suggests Israel intends to preserve the option of taking action against Iran if its government concludes that the country’s nuclear programme poses an unacceptable threat.
At the same time, reports have suggested that Israel could be preparing for the possibility of conducting military operations against Iran independently.
A report by Firstpost, citing Israel’s Channel 13, said the Israeli military was continuing preparations for potential unilateral action. Such preparations would allow Israel to retain military options even if Washington eventually chose a different approach towards Tehran.
The possibility has broader implications because any direct Israeli-Iranian confrontation could quickly affect the wider Middle East.
US officials have also expressed concerns about the risks associated with continued military action against Iran. According to a CNN report cited in the supplied material, US General Dan Caine warned that continued strikes could create new risks and that achieving certain objectives through air power alone could prove difficult.
Gaza Ceasefire Faces a Difficult Road Ahead
The latest Israeli position adds another layer of uncertainty to efforts to secure a lasting settlement in Gaza.
Any agreement would have to address several difficult questions, including Hamas’s weapons, Israeli troop withdrawals, security guarantees and the future governance of Gaza.
For Israel, the priority remains preventing Hamas from rebuilding its military capabilities.
For Hamas, surrendering its weapons would represent a fundamental change in its position and could affect its ability to influence Gaza’s future.
For the United States, the challenge is to bridge those competing demands while preventing the conflict from expanding further across the region.
The disagreements also come against the backdrop of continued Israeli military activity in Gaza despite the ceasefire framework.
That reality has made implementation particularly contentious. A ceasefire can reduce immediate violence, but it does not automatically resolve the political and security disputes that caused the conflict in the first place.
Netanyahu’s latest comments suggest Israel is not prepared to trade its core security demands for a faster diplomatic settlement.
What Netanyahu’s Position Means for Trump’s Gaza Plan
The immediate significance of Netanyahu’s statement is that any future implementation of Trump’s Gaza proposal may depend on resolving the question of Hamas disarmament.
If Israel refuses to withdraw until Hamas completely gives up its weapons, negotiations will need to establish how and when disarmament would take place.
That could involve international monitoring, security guarantees or a phased process. However, each option would carry significant political and logistical challenges.
The disagreement also places pressure on the Trump administration.
Washington will have to balance its support for Israel with its stated objective of ending the Gaza conflict. If the two governments maintain different timelines or conditions, diplomatic pressure could increase.
For now, Netanyahu appears determined to maintain his position.
His message was straightforward: Israel will cooperate with its allies, but it will not compromise on what it considers fundamental security requirements.
That stance could shape the next phase of the Gaza conflict, influence negotiations over Hamas’s future and determine how the United States approaches the broader Middle East crisis.
At the same time, Netanyahu’s warnings over Iran and his comments on Lebanon show that Israel’s strategic concerns extend well beyond Gaza. With several regional flashpoints active at once, developments on one front could quickly affect the others.
The coming weeks could therefore prove crucial for determining whether Trump’s Gaza initiative can move from a diplomatic proposal to a workable agreement—or whether disagreements over Hamas’s weapons and Israel’s security demands will continue to block a broader settlement.