Israel raises serious security concerns over proposed Hamas disarmament deal after U.S. announcement, Israeli official says

Israel has communicated to the White House that it has “serious security concerns” regarding a proposed disarmament deal with Hamas, an Israeli official told The Associated Press, prompting some of the first public comments on the proposal since it was announced by President Donald Trump earlier this week.

The Israeli official said the concerns were relayed to U.S. counterparts and characterized the issue as a security matter that Israel expects to be addressed before any arrangement could be implemented. The comments were described as among the earliest Israeli public reactions following the U.S. announcement.

According to the report published Sunday, the Israeli official’s assessment centered on whether Hamas disarmament can be carried out in a way that would meet Israel’s security requirements. While the proposal’s broad description had been shared by the White House, the report did not specify the technical details or enforcement mechanisms that Israel is questioning.

The U.S. announcement, which was credited to President Trump, positioned the proposed framework as an agreement involving Hamas disarmament. The White House’s description, as characterized in the reporting, came before Israel’s public dispute of the concept had fully emerged, setting up a new round of coordination and disagreement between the Israeli and U.S. governments.

For Israel, the disarmament issue is tied to immediate battlefield risk and longer-term governance and policing questions in the territory where Hamas operates. Any arrangement that leaves Hamas with significant weapons, operational capability, or unclear responsibilities for maintaining order would, in Israel’s view, create ongoing public-safety and national-security exposure.

The report indicates Israel’s messaging to the White House is part of ongoing interagency and diplomatic coordination, with Israeli officials pressing U.S. officials to account for Israel’s security concerns rather than relying solely on the U.S. timeline or political framing for the proposal.

It was not immediately clear from the report whether Israel has demanded changes to specific elements of the plan, such as verification, timelines, or the conditions under which weapons would be surrendered and monitored. The next steps, therefore, appear to depend on additional talks between the White House and Israeli officials and on whether the framework can be adjusted to satisfy Israel’s stated security requirements.

As discussions continue, the dispute highlights how U.S.-led diplomatic proposals can encounter friction when their security assumptions do not align with Israel’s operational needs. The coming days will likely show whether Israel’s concerns are resolved through revisions to the proposed deal or through a delay or reconsideration of any disarmament commitments that have been publicly discussed.