Why Does Hamas Continue To Reject Ceasefires?

A War Prolonged By Design...

What could have served as a breakthrough in the 21-month Israel–Hamas war instead ended in yet another collapse of ceasefire talks. U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff announced the U.S. was giving up on the latest round, and was pulling its team from negotiations in Doha, Qatar after Hamas’s latest response "shows a lack of desire" to reach an agreement to end the war. Witkoff lamented that "Hamas does not appear to be coordinated or acting in good faith," calling it "a shame that Hamas has acted in this selfish way."

The global media has been focused on the horrific suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, and the ongoing aid and hunger crisis on the ground there—including a series of separate incidents where Palestinian civilians trying to collect humanitarian aid have been shot dead by not only on some occasions the Israeli military, but also on other occasions by Hamas militants, as well as criminal gangs. War is horrifying, and images of death and destruction have a certain hypnotic magnetism to them. Of course, the nitty-gritty of hammering out a resolution to end the war has received far less attention.

And these diplomatic wranglings deserve our attention. Without an agreement to end the war, all of the underlying challenges contributing to the suffering and starvation will continue. Bringing large quantities of aid into a war zone is logistically challenging, and dangerous. And in dense urban warfare zones like Gaza, Aleppo, or Raqqa, the risks to civilians are immense. Especially in a case like Gaza, where—unlike other recent wars in Syria, Ukraine, and so forth—evacuation of civilians to safe locations outside of the territory has been extremely limited due to the borders of Gaza remaining closed since the start of the war, not only with Israel, but also with Egypt.

Under the draft terms of the failed ceasefire, Hamas would have had to release 10 living Israeli hostages (along with the remains of 18 deceased others) in phases, in exchange for Israel freeing Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails. However, the most pivotal elements of the deal concerned security arrangements. Hamas demanded that Israel pull out of Gaza entirely, allowing Hamas to remain armed and getting ready to attack again.

Indeed, senior Hamas spokesman Abu Obeida, reaffirmed in a video address that Hamas fighters were "ready to continue a long battle of attrition" and would never give up their arms without achieving their aims, which include the end of Israel.

For those among us who understand Hamas and their underlying ideology, this is unsurprising. Indeed the most surprising aspect of this to me is how bluntly Witkoff stated it. Usually one might expect a diplomat to be more diplomatic.

This mindset did not start on October 7th. As Guardian columnist Jonathan Freedland observed during the war’s first year, there is an "all-too-familiar pattern" in which "a ceasefire is followed by a pause, allowing Hamas to regroup and rearm, ready for the next escalation."

Indeed, ever since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007, every major flare-up has ended with a ceasefire, and each time Hamas has treated it as a chance to get ready for the next war. After the 2014 Gaza war (50 days of fighting), Hamas trumpeted their supposed "victory" and swiftly rebuilt its rocket arsenal and attack tunnels. After the 11-day conflict in May 2021, Hamas likewise wasted no time restocking its missile supply and began preparing for the massive October 7, 2023 surprise attack—a multi-year rearmament and training effort carried out under the cover of an ostensible truce with Israel.

The reality is that Hamas is intentionally continuing the war, spurning ceasefire offers and sacrificing Palestinian people for their ideological aims and self-proclaimed "revolutionary spirit". Hamas leaders have been entirely public about this in the past. In October 2023, then-Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh said out loud:

We need the blood of women, children, and the elderly of Gaza... so as to awaken our revolutionary spirit.

Hamas’s leadership has invested vast resources not in protecting Gaza’s civilians, but in building a subterranean fortress of bunkers and tunnels for its fighters and leaders. Hamas poured hundreds of millions of dollars—some of it diverted aid money—into an underground tunnel network that shelters its cadres and commanders.

Meanwhile, they pointedly did not build bomb shelters for the populace. In fact, Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzook proclaimed that ordinary Gazans when he said that Gazans should "look to the UN" for protection, because Hamas’s tunnels were "built to protect Hamas fighters" only.

So, while Hamas cannot defeat Israel head-to-head on the battlefield, they are making inroads in the court of public opinion.

The fact is that the prolongation of the war is damaging Israel diplomatically and reputationally. Support for the war in Gaza is down to just 32 percent of Americans, with 60 percent disapproving. A Pew survey across 24 countries earlier in 2025 showed that most respondents now hold negative views of Israel and its Prime Minister Netanyahu. Surveyed publics from North America, Europe, Latin America, Asia, and sub‑Saharan Africa overwhelmingly disapproved of Israel, with support rates persistently low, especially in Western Europe and the Global South.

But that is a long-term problem for Israel. It doesn't give any actual relief to Palestinians who right now are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Since the start of the war with Israel, entire neighbourhoods have been flattened. Civilian infrastructure has been destroyed. And although the Gaza Health Ministry does not differentiate between Hamas fighters and civilians in their casualty figures, it's safe to say that at least tens of thousands of civilians have been killed.

This puts Palestinians in an unbearable position. The vast majority of people in Gaza are not Hamas fighters, and they are not involved in Hamas' decision making in any way. They are ordinary civilians—families, students, shopkeepers, teachers—trying to survive in deadly conditions. When Hamas rejects a ceasefire that could alleviate suffering in order to maintain leverage, it is not acting on behalf of those civilians. In fact this is hostile behaviour towards the civilians of Gaza.

There is Palestinian outrage against Hamas for all of this, and many Palestinians wish to see them kicked out of power. In March 2025, Palestinians took to the streets in northern Gaza, chanting slogans like "Hamas out" and "We want to live." For three consecutive days, residents of Beit Lahiya and Jabaliya marched amid the rubble of their neighbourhoods, demanding not only an end to the war, but an end to Hamas’s rule. Protesters held signs calling for a ceasefire and a new leadership that prioritises life over ideology.

Hamas responded exactly as it has in the past: with repression. Witnesses and human rights groups reported that Hamas security forces beat demonstrators, detained organisers, and executed a small number of protesters who they falsely accused of "collaborating with the enemy."

But the tide may be turning. While some in the West continue to romanticise Hamas as a "resistance" movement, Arab states—who know the Palestinian cause far better than green-haired Americans chanting to "globalise the intifada"—are increasingly saying that they’ve had enough.

In a striking development at the United Nations in July 2025, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt—three of the most influential Arab nations involved in the Gaza conflict—signed a joint declaration calling for Hamas to disarm and leave Gaza. The statement endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, but also condemned October 7th, and made clear that Hamas’s continued military control of Gaza is incompatible with that vision.

These are not countries that historically are known for aligning themselves with Israeli narratives. Nor do they shy away from criticising Israeli policies. Qatar has hosted Hamas’s political leadership for years, and has previously justified their actions and offered major support. Saudi Arabia has traditionally walked a careful line on Palestinian issues, pledging no recognition for Israel until there is a 2-state solution. Egypt, sharing a border with Gaza, has been deeply involved in ceasefire mediation. For all three to publicly and jointly call for Hamas to relinquish power marks a profound shift, and a serious indictment of Hamas’s role in prolonging Palestinian suffering.

This isn’t about defending Israel. These countries’ leaderships have their own long-standing critiques of Israeli policies and conduct. But it is about a growing recognition that Hamas is a dead end—for Palestinians, for peace, and for regional stability.

It also reflects a broader truth that gets obscured in the chaos of war: support for Palestinian dignity and self-determination does not require supporting Hamas. In fact, as I have argued ever since the start of the war and before, being pro-Palestinian requires opposing Hamas and opposing any further Hamas control of Gaza.

Will this Arab resolution against Hamas finally end Hamas' grip over Gaza and give Palestinians in Gaza a chance at a peaceful future? I don't know. If this is just cheap talk, and nothing is done to enforce it, then it is worth the paper it is written on. But if Qatar in particular can get serious about withdrawing political cover and financial support, this could be the turning point. Qatar has long been one of the group’s key financial and political lifelines. If the monarchy in Doha were to firmly end their relationship with Hamas it would send a shockwave through the region. Without foreign political shelter and money, the foundations of Hamas's rule in Gaza would begin to erode.

But the question remains: will they?

There are many reasons for skepticism. Declarations at UN conferences do not always translate into anything beyond hot air. And Hamas remains deeply entrenched—not just physically, through its tunnel network, but socially, through its multi-decade grip on civil institutions in Gaza.

Yet there is also plenty of reason for hope. The fact that Arab states are now publicly and in full voice naming Hamas as part of the problem—rather than shielding it under some broader banner of Palestinian "resistance"—represents a long-overdue shift. It cracks the illusion that to oppose Hamas is to betray Palestine. That is simply false. And increasingly, the Arab world knows it.