Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) expressed skepticism on Monday that Hamas will comply with disarmament requirements in its U.S.-backed ceasefire agreement with Israel, saying that finishing off the terrorist group may require further confrontation from Israel. 

“To expect Hamas to disarm without the threat of confrontation is unrealistic,” Graham wrote in a post on X. “Therefore, it is my growing belief that Hamas is not going to disarm but instead is in the process of consolidating power in Gaza by attacking those who oppose them.” 

Few Republican lawmakers have thus far questioned if President Donald Trump’s 20-point peace plan — which has brought all the living hostages back to Israel — will be sufficient to take Hamas out of power in Gaza. 

“Under the current approach, every day that goes by allows Hamas to get stronger and more lethal,” said Graham. “The world needs to understand that Israel cannot tolerate this outcome. If Israel feels it needs to reengage in Gaza to finish Hamas off, they have my full support.”

Israel currently controls 58% of Gaza, marked by a yellow “initial withdrawal line,” while Hamas maintains a presence in the western part of the enclave. The terrorist group has failed to disarm or relinquish power yet, as indicated in Phase 1 of Trump’s proposal, instead mobilizing more fighters and clashing with rival Palestinian gangs. 

Phase 2 Trump’s plan envisions an International Stabilization Force, comprised of troops from mediating countries, to stabilize the Gaza Strip. However, several leaders have indicated they have  little appetite to participate, including the King of Jordan, who told the BBC “nobody will want to touch” peace enforcing.

“I completely agree with the King of Jordan’s analysis regarding what it takes to stabilize the Gaza strip,” Graham said on X. “To expect an international force to go to war with Hamas to require their disarmament is unrealistic.”

With Trump’s plan at a standstill, experts say a new strategy may be required in Gaza.  

“If Hamas refuses to disarm and no international force steps forward that is prepared to do the hard work of forcibly disarming it, why should the world grant Hamas a total veto over positive movement on the rest of Trump’s 20-point plan?” John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, told Jewish Insider. “There’s no doubt that both in Israel and the United States there is active discussion of how to take advantage of this.”

After an agreement was reached between Israel and Hamas to initiate the first stage of President Donald Trump’s ceasefire proposal in mid-October, the IDF retreated to an “initial withdrawal line,” leaving Israeli forces in control of 58% of the enclave as Israel and mediators push Hamas to release the remaining deceased hostages and comply with the rest of the agreement, including disarmament and relinquishing power. 

The line divides Gaza in two: an “East,” controlled by the IDF and serving as a buffer zone to Israel, and a “West,” run by Hamas and host to the concentrated Palestinian population.

In interviews with Jewish Insider, experts painted a picture of two Gazas, explaining that the area Israel holds can be used strategically to root out Hamas and maintain leverage if hostilities resume. But challenges lie ahead in rebuilding the enclave and moving Palestinians back into the eastern region.

“There are virtually no Palestinians living in the eastern part of Gaza beyond the yellow line. The eastern part does not see the movement and the maneuvers of Hamas. That’s still confined to the western part,” Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Gaza native and resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, told JI. “Actual civilians of Gaza are all entirely under Hamas’ control in the west.”

Alkhatib said Israel has kept Palestinians from returning to the east over security and operational concerns, but also as leverage.

“How do you ensure that you don’t have Hamas members embedding themselves into the civilians, as they have done time and again? How do you ensure that Gazans coming into the east aren’t hindering clearance operations of tunnels or unexploded munitions?” Alkhatib asked. “I also think that the return of Palestinians to beyond the ‘yellow zone’ is leverage that Israel is holding onto until phase one is thoroughly and fully complete.”

Vice President JD Vance, in Israel last week, said during his trip that Palestinians should be able to move into a “Hamas-free zone” in southern Gaza “in the next couple months.” But experts warned that the timeline will be difficult given the conditions on the ground.

David May, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said Israel has developed technology to recognize Hamas fighters and could use it to allow non-combatants access to the area under Israeli control. But even if Israel can vet who enters, eastern Gaza has endured destruction comparable to the west, and serious concerns await displaced civilians.

“The ubiquitous tunnel system that Hamas has dug in Gaza, which no doubt traverses the yellow line that serves as the ceasefire line, limits Israel’s ability to provide a safe zone in the eastern portion of Gaza,” May told JI.

Palestinians who move into the Hamas-free zone and those working on rebuilding would also face the issue of land ownership, Alkhatib noted.

“Who owns these lands, and where do people have their homes? Every plot of land in Gaza is accounted for,” he said. “You can’t just rebuild Gaza without taking into consideration that you’re doing so over pieces of land and properties that belonged to people.”

“There could be a process in which that happens, regardless of any claims to the land,” Alkhatib continued. “Basically there could be a fund established that allows for the compensation of rightful owners. But beyond that, eastern Gaza could be developed to create a compelling example that others in Gaza want to be part of.”

Despite these challenges, experts say finding ways to take in Palestinians to east Gaza could isolate Hamas in the west — a strategy Israel could use to undermine the terrorist group’s authority and bring in international support for rebuilding.

“East Gaza under IDF control would become a Hamas-free zone where the world comes together to support the emergence of thriving new political, social and economic institutions where the lives of average Gazans would flourish,” said John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America. 

“Hamas-controlled west Gaza, by contrast, would be condemned to repression, stagnation and sustained misery. Over time, the east would become a huge magnet for the vast majority of Gaza’s population who would vote with their feet to live within a ‘free Gaza,’ fatally isolating and undermining Hamas rule and legitimacy,” Hannah continued.

May said this contrast can show Gazans “an alternative to life under Hamas’ corruption and oppression” and make donors more likely to contribute to rebuilding projects knowing aid won’t be intercepted by Hamas.

“If there is running water, sewer, electricity, internet, fixed roads and infrastructure, if there is something that resembles jobs and economic opportunity, and you create vetted methods for accepting incoming civilians into that area, then absolutely there could be a way in such that slowly drains the population out of west Gaza,” said Alkhatib.

However, Hannah argued that keeping half the enclave as a buffer zone could also serve Israel’s interests if fighting resumes.

“Right now, Israel controls an extensive buffer zone containing very few hostile Gazans standing between its border communities and Hamas-controlled west Gaza,” said Hannah. “How eager should [Israel] be to attract over a million or more Gazans to pick up and move much closer to Israel’s borders?”

May said Israel may have plenty of time to decide on how to proceed should Hamas continue to be uncooperative with the implementation of the rest of the first phase of the agreement. 

“There is still a lot up in the air,” said May. “As ceasefire lines in the Middle East have a tendency to become permanent borders, Israel needs to plan for the possibility of the yellow line becoming a long-term territorial marker.” 

A group of 30 House Democrats urged Secretary of State Marco Rubio to leverage a joint statement from the Arab League this summer — which called for Hamas’ disarmament and removal of power, the release of hostages and a path toward a two-state solution — as a potential diplomatic breakthrough for the region.

The lawmakers also condemned the unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state recently undertaken by several close U.S. allies.

“While there is much we disagree with in the statement, we do believe that this breakthrough presents a rare and urgent opportunity to ensure Israel’s security and create a brighter future for innocent Palestinians free from Hamas through American leadership,” the lawmakers said in a letter to Rubio on Thursday, emphasizing that it is the first time the Arab League has explicitly rejected Hamas.

“The statement made at the conference offers a unique opportunity — one that strengthens both Israel’s long-term security and Palestinians’ aspirations for self-determination under accountable, nonviolent leadership,” the letter continues. “While we once again emphasize that we do not endorse everything in the text, we recognize the unprecedented nature of the declaration and believe it presents a positive shift that opens the door to productive diplomacy and long-term solutions.”

The lawmakers urged Rubio to work with Israel to bring together regional and international partners to broker an agreement that would immediately and unconditionally free the hostages, remove Hamas from power in Gaza and achieve a “responsible deescalation of the conflict” in Gaza that would allow for rebuilding, governmental reform and peace.

They said that such an approach would be “far more constructive than recent unilateral and performative recognitions of a Palestinian state by other nations, which risk emboldening Hamas, entrenching division, and undermining the very legitimacy and peace such recognition purports to advance.”

“With regional partners signaling readiness to help facilitate both security and governance transitions, the United States has a pivotal role to play in turning principle into progress toward a two-state solution,” the letter reads. “This is a chance to protect Israel — our strongest ally — and align American values with regional momentum, and also leave a lasting legacy.”

The letter was led by Reps. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA), Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), Greg Landsman (D-OH) and Tim Kennedy (D-NY), joined by Reps. Dan Goldman (D-NY), Grace Meng (D-NY), Marilyn Strickland (D-WA), Emilia Sykes (D-OH), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), Frank Pallone (D-NJ), Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Kim Schrier (D-WA), Tom Suozzi (D-NY), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Brad Schneider (D-IL), Angie Craig (D-MN), Kevin Mullin (D-CA), Juan Vargas (D-CA), Ritchie Torres (D-NY), Chris Pappas (D-NH), Eric Swalwell (D-CA), Ted Lieu (D-CA), George Latimer (D-NY), Haley Stevens (D-MI), Darren Soto (D-FL), Greg Stanton (D-AZ), Nikki Budzinski (D-IL), Shri Thanedar (D-MI) and Wesley Bell (D-MO).

Craig, Pappas and Stevens are all running for the Senate in their respective states.

Democratic Majority for Israel supported the letter.

“The U.S. must act quickly to seize on this diplomatic opportunity which presents a unique opening to both ensure Israel’s security and create a future for Israelis and Palestinians free from the terrorist group Hamas,” the group’s CEO, Brian Romick, said in a statement. “While there is much we disagree with in the Arab League statement, its historic nature is unprecedented. By calling for the release of hostages, condemning the October 7 attacks, disavowing Hamas and endorsing a two-state path, Arab countries have signaled a potential willingness to be part of a new, constructive chapter for the Middle East.”

“At the same time, we call on all leaders to reject unilateral performative recognition of a Palestinian state which risks emboldening Hamas rather than advancing peace,” Romick continued.

Michel Issa, the Lebanese-American businessman nominated by the Trump administration to serve as U.S. ambassador to Lebanon, said Tuesday that the Lebanese government and armed forces must act swiftly and decisively to disarm Hezbollah and remove its influence across Lebanese society.

Issa argued at his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing that the war between Israel and Hezbollah, “while devastating, has opened a narrow but meaningful window for progress,” in combination with the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire deal, the fall of the Assad regime in Syria and recent blows to Iran’s military and nuclear program. 

He praised the new Lebanese government as a “promising development,” saying it has made progress in combating Hezbollah’s influence.

“The Iran-Israel escalation is a reminder of how delicate an opportunity this is that could be squandered if Iran drags Lebanon back down to the path of conflict,” Issa continued. “The government has made clear it will not tolerate any violation of the cessation of hostility, and since implementation, they have begun to curb Hezbollah’s influence. But more must be done. Urgently. The full disarmament of Hezbollah is not optional. It is essential. The time to act is now.”

Finishing that job and rooting out Hezbollah’s influence across Lebanon will be difficult and take time, he added, given its decades of influence and domination across Lebanese society.

“Hezbollah needs to go. Hezbollah needs to be disarmed to bring some kind of hope to Lebanon,” he said. As long as supply lines from Iran remain cut and with continued support from the United States and other partners, he continued, he believes that over time Hezbollah’s influence can be minimized and the government can secure its hold on power.

Issa said that it’s critical that the Lebanese government maintain full control of rebuilding efforts in southern Lebanon, and that it cannot allow Hezbollah to “hijack” that work as it has in the past. He added that the country must work to ensure governance reform and financial stability, accountability and growth.

He also argued that the U.S. should continue to push for a final settlement regarding the borders between Israel and Lebanon and ultimately normalize relations between the two countries.

Issa spoke highly of the Lebanese Armed Forces, saying that they will be critical to efforts to combat Hezbollah and have been a partner to the United States, which the LAF should continue to support and cooperate with. He said that the LAF is one of the few institutions that enjoys widespread trust and support within Lebanon.

“They are doing a great role in creating stability that is very well needed in Lebanon,” Issa said. “I believe they are ready to do whatever they need to do, to take over and to become the sole military power for the Lebanese government.”

Asked about whether the mandate for the United Nations peacekeeping force in Lebanon, UNIFIL, should be extended, Issa did not offer a definitive answer, saying that its role is changing with the LAF stepping up its role in monitoring the border with Israel and ensuring that Hezbollah does not continue to threaten the Jewish state.

Issa, who was born in Beirut, said that he had renounced his Lebanese citizenship in connection with his nomination, to show his commitment to the American people and the U.S.’ interests.

Duke Buchan, an investment banker who served as U.S. ambassador to Spain in Trump’s first term and is now nominated to be U.S. ambassador to Morocco, testified alongside Issa.

Buchan said repeatedly that he would work to support the Abraham Accords, both to expand the relationship between Israel and Morocco and to urge Morocco to encourage other countries to normalize relations with Israel.

He said it would be one of his “highest priorities” to work to reestablish the Negev Forum dialogue among Israel and its Arab allies, and to convince Morocco to “step up even more.”

Buchan said he supports U.S. recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over the Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony claimed by both Morocco and the indigenous Sahrawi people, a significant contingent of whom are refugees living in Algeria. The U.S. agreed to recognize Moroccan sovereignty over the territory when the country joined the Abraham Accords in 2020. 

“Secretary [of State Marco] Rubio reiterated that the United States recognizes Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara and supports Morocco’s serious, credible and realistic autonomy proposal as the only basis for a just and lasting solution to the dispute,” Buchan said. “If confirmed, I will facilitate progress towards this goal.”

But pressed later in the hearing on bipartisan concerns about the U.S.’ decision to recognize Moroccan sovereignty, Buchan said he was not familiar with those concerns and that he would defer to the president and secretary of state to set policy.