Gaza ceasefire talks stall in Egypt over disarmament demands and tunnel maps
Ceasefire talks on Gaza held in Egypt are facing a serious obstacle over the future of weapons held by Palestinian factions. The immediate dispute centres on demands for Hamas to hand over tunnel maps, surrender arms and account for privately held weapons in the enclave. The negotiations are taking place as mediators try to advance a U.S.-backed ceasefire framework agreed in October 2025.
Sponsored
According to people involved in the Cairo discussions, the most difficult issue is Clause 8 of the ceasefire plan, which sets out how disarmament would work and how military infrastructure in post-war Gaza would be managed. Nickolay Mladenov, described as the high representative of the Board of Peace, has pressed for the handover of underground networks and for no weapons to remain in Gaza. The same account says the demand extends beyond organised armed groups to firearms privately held by Palestinians.
The talks have not collapsed, but they are described as deadlocked on the question of weapons. Palestinian factions had offered to store heavy weapons, including rockets, missiles and Kornet anti-tank missiles that Hamas is believed to possess, but that proposal has not resolved the wider dispute. A source familiar with the internal dynamics of the negotiations said Hamas had initially shown high positivity toward the clause and, for the first time, engaged with the issue of heavy weapons storage.
The disagreement matters because disarmament is one of the central tests of any durable ceasefire in Gaza. The October 2025 framework is meant not only to stop fighting but also to define how security responsibilities would eventually be transferred to a unified Palestinian body. If the sides cannot agree on who controls weapons and military infrastructure, the broader political transition envisioned in the plan is likely to remain stalled.
Sponsored
The current round also reflects a wider struggle over how far the ceasefire terms should go. Palestinian officials argue that an unconditional disarmament demand would effectively align the mediator with Israel's most far-reaching position. Hamas and other factions, by contrast, have linked any handover of weapons to the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, making the sequencing of steps a core point of contention.
The issue of tunnel networks adds another layer of sensitivity. Underground routes have long been a major part of Hamas's military infrastructure, and the request for maps would give mediators and any future security body more information about the scale and location of that system. The inclusion of privately held weapons also suggests the talks are not limited to formal military stockpiles, but extend to the broader armed environment inside Gaza.
The negotiations are being watched closely because they sit at the centre of the post-war question for Gaza: who governs, who polices, and who controls force. The Board of Peace, led in this process by Mladenov, is presented as part of the oversight structure for the transition, while Palestinian factions are seeking guarantees that disarmament will not be one-sided. That tension makes the current round more than a technical discussion, since it goes to the heart of any future settlement.
What remains unclear is whether the mediators can bridge the gap between a demand for full and immediate disarmament and the factions' insistence on linking weapons handover to Israeli withdrawal. It is also not clear whether the competing drafts of Clause 8 can be reconciled into a single text acceptable to all sides. For now, the talks continue in Egypt, with the weapons question still the main test of whether the ceasefire framework can move forward.
Sponsored
Sponsored
