Trump's Board of Peace Gaza Disarmament Deal: What Was Announced, Why Israel Rejected It, and How Accounts Differed

On July 30, 2026, U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social that his "Board of Peace" had reached what he called a "historic" agreement for the "complete disarmament" of Hamas and all other armed groups in Gaza, describing it as a major milestone in his 20-point plan to end the war . The announcement was met with swift rejection from Israel, conflicting accounts from Hamas and mediators, and continued violence on the ground. This article breaks down what was announced, why Israel opposed it, and what remained uncertain.

What the Proposed Deal Included

According to Trump's social media posts, a source familiar with the talks, and statements from Hamas officials, the proposed agreement included several key components:

• Complete disarmament: Hamas and all other armed groups in Gaza would surrender their weapons, to be carried out in phases .
• Phased Israeli military withdrawal: Israeli forces would gradually pull out of Gaza as disarmament proceeded .
• New Palestinian administration: The deal would pave the way for a new Palestinian government to govern Gaza in coordination with the Board of Peace .
• International Stabilization Force: An international security force would work with a new Palestinian police force to secure the enclave .
• Mediating countries: Egypt, Qatar, and Turkey acted as mediators in brokering the agreement .
• Phased implementation: Trump described the process as structured phases, not a single event .

A significant uncertainty surrounded the announcement: it was not clear whether Hamas and Israel were themselves parties to the agreement Trump described. The New York Times reported there was "no immediate comment from Hamas or Israel" and that it was unclear whether either side had signed on .

Why Israel Rejected the Proposal

Israel's opposition came swiftly and from multiple levels of government, reflecting long-standing policy differences with the Board of Peace framework.

Netanyahu's office had raised objections months earlier. In January 2026, after the Board of Peace was formed without Israeli involvement, the Prime Minister called a meeting with senior advisers and issued a statement that the initiative was "not coordinated with Israel and contradicts its policy" . Following Trump's July 30 announcement, an Israeli official told The Times of Israel that the Board of Peace's 15-point proposal "does not adequately address" Jerusalem's demands for "complete demilitarization, which is a precondition for any process" . A separate Israeli official poured cold water on the optimism, saying any deal seen as rewarding Hamas would be unacceptable .

National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir was unequivocal in his rejection. On July 30, he stated: "Destroying Hamas and encouraging the emigration of Palestinians is the only solution in Gaza that Israel is prepared to be a partner in" . He declared, "With the devil, whose banner is our destruction... you do not sign agreements" . Ben Gvir had already voted against the limited entry of an International Stabilization Force into Gaza on July 27, arguing that Hamas had failed to fulfill its commitment to disarm .

Broader Israeli opposition stemmed from several factors: the view that the Board of Peace was sidelining Israel from key decisions, the belief that Hamas had not genuinely disarmed, and concerns that the proposed deal would leave Hamas' structure intact rather than achieving its destruction — a position long held by Netanyahu and his coalition partners .

Differing Accounts and Continued Violence

A central complication was that different parties described the status of negotiations very differently.

Hamas officials told Agence France-Presse on July 30 that an agreement had been reached addressing the group's weapons and the gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza — though their account described it as an agreement "reached with Israel," directly contradicting Israel's official position . A senior Hamas official said the movement expected the mediators and the Board of Peace to ensure Israel's compliance .

Mediators in Cairo reported that talks were still ongoing and that key details remained unsettled, suggesting Trump's announcement may have been premature relative to the actual diplomatic progress .

Meanwhile, Israeli strikes continued on the same day as Trump's announcement. Reuters reported that Israeli airstrikes killed at least three people, including two children, in Gaza on July 30, even as mediators held new talks with Hamas leaders . The Board of Peace itself declined immediate comment on the substance of Trump's announcement .

What Remains Unclear

Several critical questions were unanswered in the immediate aftermath:

• Whether Hamas and Israel had formally signed onto the agreement Trump described
• Whether the disarmament terms included specific mechanisms for verification and enforcement
• Whether the proposed new Palestinian government had any political mandate or recognition from Palestinian factions
• Whether Israel's rejection would effectively kill the deal or whether further negotiations could bridge the gap

Trump's announcement represented an ambitious diplomatic claim, but the gap between the White House's stated agreement and the reality on the ground — with an Israeli government opposed, mediators still talking, and violence continuing — underscored the enormous challenges facing any Gaza peace initiative.

Background: Trump's 20-Point Plan and the Board of Peace

The Board of Peace was established under Trump's broader "20-point plan" to end the war in Gaza, first unveiled in September 2025 . The plan envisioned a phased approach to post-war governance, reconstruction, and security, with the Board of Peace acting as an international oversight body . Its executive committee included figures such as former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, the Turkish foreign minister, and a Qatari official — but notably no Israeli representatives, a decision that fueled Israel's early opposition . The plan's ambitions had already been scaled back significantly, with a full Gaza recovery plan replaced by a limited pilot humanitarian zone project .