Earlier this week, Hamas, the militant group that controls the Gaza Strip, announced it would dissolve its government and hand over administrative authority after nearly two decades in power.
The group said the move is aimed at paving the way for the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), which is set to take over civilian administration from October 2025 as part of a US-brokered peace plan.
However, it remains controversial whether the declaration is truly a political turn or is primarily symbolic. Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar immediately reacted with skepticism, saying that as long as Hamas, which is classified as a terrorist organization by Germany, the EU, the US and other countries, retains its weapons, any civilian government would ultimately act according to Hamas’ instructions.
Saar also reiterated that the complete disarmament of Hamas and demilitarization of the Gaza Strip remain prerequisites for political realignment.
Neither symbolism nor renunciation of power
Many observers see the move neither as mere symbolism nor as an actual abdication of power, but as an attempt to revive a political process that had been stalled for months, without committing to disarmament.
In October 2025, the US peace plan already outlined a new administration consisting of independent technocrats. The NCAG, a transitional body composed of Palestinian experts who are observers of Donald Trump’s peace board, began its work in January 2026. However, its members still live in Cairo, Egypt, awaiting permission to enter Gaza.
For Simon Wolfgang Fuchs, an Islamic studies scholar who teaches at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, it is not the formal dissolution of the Hamas government that is decisive, but its political message.
“With its unusually restrained public appearance, Hamas wanted to signal that the group is not to blame for the lack of political progress,” Fuchs told DW.
He said that in contrast to earlier public presentations, Hamas deliberately avoided any hostile displays and tried to give the impression that it was abiding by the US-brokered peace plan and ready to move forward with it.
Kickstarting Gaza’s transition process
Under the peace plan, a technocratic administration was believed to have begun its work, and Israel was believed to gradually withdraw its troops from the Gaza Strip.
“In fact, the opposite has happened,” Fuchs said.
Israel has more control over the Gaza Strip today than it did a few months ago. That’s why Fuchs sees Hamas’s statement as an attempt to “break out of this impasse and get the political process moving again.”
The Washington Institute, a think tank, noted It was reported as early as February that transferring civilian administration to a technocratic government was part of the US peace plan from the beginning.
This week, British newspaper Guardian quotedMiddle East experts Max Rodenback and Muhammad Shehda say that Hamas wants to discredit Israel by arguing that its rule is causing reconstruction to fail, as well as increasing political pressure on Israel and the US. In his view, the issue is now less about who rules Gaza and more about the conditions under which reconstruction can begin.
Nevertheless, significant doubts remain. Although Hamas has expressed its willingness to hand over to civilian administration, it has not done so with respect to its weapons. Many analyzes identify this as a real point of contention. according to think tank security council reportThe Peace Board report, which provides input to the UN Security Council, called for a 15-point roadmap under which Hamas would relinquish all military, police and administrative functions, and a transitional administration would be assumed entirely by a body of technocrats.
According to the roadmap developed by the Peace Board, the disarmament of Hamas and Israel’s gradual withdrawal are to proceed in parallel. The Security Council report emphasizes that these interconnected steps are still stalled, stunting the transition process.
Israel-Hamas conflict remains unresolved
Fuchs also considers the military issue as a decisive litmus test. On the one hand, there are signs that Washington currently wants to prioritize the establishment of a civilian administration over the immediate disarmament of Hamas. On the other hand, this is what explains Israeli skepticism.
“There is concern that while Hamas may want to discuss civilian structures, it is indefinitely postponing the military question,” Fuchs said.
Furthermore, the announced transfer of power has so far had no practical consequences. Members of the transitional government live outside the Gaza Strip; There is a shortage of funds, personnel and security forces; And the International Stabilization Force has so far existed only on paper. Ministries have to continue their work for now.
“Right now, the dissolution of the administration is primarily symbolic,” Fuchs said. “That’s why, right now, everything is the same.”
israeli newspaper jerusalem post score In a second possible scenario: Hamas could dissolve its government and step back from direct responsibility, while maintaining its influence behind the scenes. The authors wonder whether the organization is actually giving up power or merely changing its role.
It remains to be seen whether Hamas’s statement will actually bring political success. Although this may get the stopped process going again, it does not resolve the conflict. Until the transitional administration can begin its work and there is no progress on security, disarmament, or reconstruction, this move is likely to remain one thing above all else: a political gesture with an uncertain outcome.
This article was originally published in German.