On Sunday, President Donald Trump announced a new proposal intended to bring an end to the war in Gaza, claiming that Israel had acquiesced to the terms he set forth. Trump, adopting a characteristic tone of warning, urged Hamas to accept the conditions, asserting that he had apprised the group of the “consequences” should they decline.

The proposal, ambitious in its scope and compressed in its timetable, demands the release of all captives, regardless of their condition, within forty-eight hours of the agreement’s signing. In tandem, Palestinian prisoners serving life sentences, as well as detainees from Gaza, would be released. An immediate sixty-day ceasefire would ensue, or persist until negotiations are concluded, with Trump offering his personal guarantee of good faith in the deliberations.

At the heart of the prospective negotiations are questions both perennial and contentious: the definition of Hamas, the prospect of disarmament, the formation of a new government, and the conditions for Israeli withdrawal, contingent either on the establishment of such a government or the successful conclusion of talks. Provisions for amnesty for members of Hamas are also included, alongside the promise of unfettered humanitarian aid to Gaza.

Late on Sunday, Hamas issued a statement acknowledging receipt of what it described as “ideas from the American side” for a possible ceasefire. The group expressed a willingness to engage in negotiations, specifying its readiness to discuss the release of all prisoners in exchange for an unequivocal declaration to end the hostilities and effect a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.