World Peace

ISRAEL’S IHL & HRL VIOLATIONS

Considering IHL & HRL, as of today, what are Israel’s human rights violations?

GoogleAI Mode: “As of today, January 2, 2026, international bodies and human rights organizations allege that Israel has committed numerous violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Law (HRL), particularly in the Gaza Strip and the occupied West Bank. These actions are the subject of ongoing scrutiny, including a genocide case brought by South Africa before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), where a UN commission of inquiry also concluded that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza. 

Key alleged violations include:

In the Gaza Strip

Indiscriminate Attacks and Civilian Deaths: Reports cite war crimes encompassing indiscriminate attacks on civilians and civilian objects, leading to unprecedented death tolls among children, journalists, and health workers.

Starvation as a Weapon of War: The use of starvation as a method of warfare is alleged, with severe restrictions on the entry and distribution of humanitarian aid and the destruction of essential infrastructure like water supplies and hospitals. The ICJ has issued binding orders for Israel to allow unhindered aid access, which reports suggest have been ignored.

Forced Displacement: There are reports of repeated forced displacement amounting to forcible transfer, with a significant portion of Gaza’s population displaced to unlivable conditions.

Targeting of Civilian Infrastructure: Attacks on healthcare facilities, educational institutions, and shelters for displaced persons have been widely reported.

Arbitrary Restrictions on Aid: In late 2025, Israel announced it would halt the operations of several international humanitarian organizations in Gaza starting in 2026, a move criticized by the UN and aid leaders for further exacerbating the humanitarian crisis. 

In the West Bank and East Jerusalem

Unlawful Killings and Violence: The level of violence by Israeli state forces and settlers has increased significantly, resulting in hundreds of Palestinian deaths and injuries.

Home Demolitions and Displacement: Mass demolitions of Palestinian homes and property destruction continue, leading to the displacement of residents.

Arbitrary Detention and Torture: Thousands of Palestinians have been subjected to arbitrary detention and ill-treatment, with credible reports of severe physical and sexual abuse, and torture in detention facilities. 

International Legal Proceedings

International Court of Justice (ICJ): In the ongoing genocide case brought by South Africa, the ICJ has issued several provisional measures ordering Israel to prevent genocidal acts and ensure aid access. A recent UN commission of inquiry report concluded that Israel’s actions constitute genocide.

International Criminal Court (ICC): The ICC is conducting an ongoing investigation into alleged war crimes. In December 2025, the ICC rejected an Israeli legal challenge to stop the investigation, and arrest warrants for Israeli leaders remain in place.”

HAMAS’ IHL & HRL VIOLATIONS

Considering IHL & HRL, as of today, what are Hamas’ human rights violations?

GoogleAI Mode: “As of January 2, 2026, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups have been accused by international bodies and human rights organizations of extensive violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL) stemming from the October 7, 2023, attacks and their subsequent conduct in the Gaza Strip. 

Key violations identified by the United Nations and other legal entities include:

War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity

Direct and Indiscriminate Attacks on Civilians: UN investigations concluded that Hamas and affiliated groups deliberately killed, injured, and mistreated hundreds of civilians during the October 7 attacks. Continued indiscriminate firing of rockets and mortars toward Israeli civilian populations is cited as a persistent violation of IHL.

Sexual and Gender-Based Violence: Documented evidence from multiple sources indicates that Hamas fighters committed acts of conflict-related sexual violence, including rape and mutilation, during the initial attacks and against individuals in captivity.

Hostage-Taking: The abduction and continued holding of civilians is a grave breach of IHL. Reports as recently as late 2025 highlight that released hostages showed signs of severe ill-treatment, and Amnesty International formally designated these actions as crimes against humanity in December 2025. 

Conduct of Hostilities (IHL)

Human Shields and Use of Civilian Infrastructure: Hamas has been accused of operating within densely populated civilian areas and using civilian objects, such as schools and hospitals, for military purposes, which violates the IHL principle of distinction.

Deceptive Warfare: Reports indicate instances of fighters dressing in civilian clothing to deceive enemy combatants, a violation of IHL. 

Violations within Gaza (IHRL) 

Extrajudicial Executions: In late 2025, reports emerged of Hamas and affiliated groups engaging in summary public executions of Palestinians in Gaza, sometimes in retaliation for internal clashes or alleged “collaboration”.

Mistreatment of Detainees: Hostages released in late 2025 and early 2026 have reported suffering from starvation and severe physical abuse while held in tunnels and hiding places. 

International Legal Status

ICC Arrest Warrants: As of early 2026, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has active arrest warrants for senior Hamas leadership, including Mohamed Deif (Ibrahim Al-Masri), for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including murder, torture, and hostage-taking. While Israel has claimed Deif was killed, the ICC maintains the warrant to ensure accountability.

Confirmation of Charges: The ICC has provisionally scheduled a confirmation of charges hearing for at least one Hamas official for May 19, 2026.”

THE SOLUTIONS

What are the solutions?

GoogleAI Mode: “Based on International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Law (HRL), solutions focus on accountability, compliance with international law, addressing root causes, and implementing international decisions to achieve a just and lasting peace.

Key solutions and mechanisms proposed by international bodies and human rights organizations as of January 2, 2026, include:

1. Upholding International Law and Accountability

Compliance with International Court Rulings: All parties, especially Israel as the occupying power, must comply with the binding orders and provisional measures issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This includes allowing unhindered humanitarian aid access to Gaza and preventing genocidal acts.

Cooperation with International Criminal Court (ICC): States are urged to cooperate with the ongoing ICC investigation and enforce existing arrest warrants for individuals credibly implicated in war crimes and crimes against humanity on both sides (Israeli and Hamas leaders).

Independent Investigations: Both Israeli and Palestinian authorities should conduct independent, impartial, and effective investigations into alleged violations of international law, cooperating fully with international investigative mechanisms like the UN Commission of Inquiry.

Universal Jurisdiction: National judiciaries can investigate and prosecute those implicated in serious international crimes under the principle of universal jurisdiction.

Sanctions and Arms Embargoes: States, especially those with significant leverage (like the US, UK, EU), should impose targeted sanctions on officials responsible for war crimes and consider suspending arms transfers to any party found to be committing or facilitating atrocities. 

2. Immediate Humanitarian Actions

Immediate and Sustained Ceasefire: An immediate and permanent ceasefire is considered essential to stop the mass civilian suffering and death, and to facilitate humanitarian efforts.

Unimpeded Humanitarian Access: Israel must immediately lift the blockade of Gaza, restore essential services (water, electricity), and ensure the safe, unhindered delivery of all necessary aid, including food, medicine, and fuel, through all crossings.

Hostage Release: Hamas and other armed groups must immediately and unconditionally release all remaining hostages.

Protect Aid Workers: All parties must protect humanitarian and UN personnel and ensure their operations are not restricted. 

3. Addressing Root Causes and Political Solutions

Ending the Occupation and Apartheid: The UN and human rights experts emphasize that a just and lasting peace requires Israel to end its 56-year military occupation of Palestinian territory, cease illegal settlement activities, and dismantle apartheid policies.

Palestinian Self-Determination: A political solution must allow for the full realization of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, potentially through a viable two-State solution with secure, internationally recognized borders based on pre-1967 lines and an open Jerusalem as the capital of both states.

Rejecting Forced Displacement: Any attempts at demographic and territorial change, or the forced displacement of the Palestinian population from Gaza or the West Bank, are explicitly rejected under international law.

International Framework: Sustained diplomacy within a multilateral framework, rather than unilateral impositions, is needed to ensure peace is grounded in international law and involves regional players.”

UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION

Explain: National judiciaries can investigate and prosecute those implicated in serious international crimes under the principle of universal jurisdiction.

GoogleAI Mode: “Universal jurisdiction allows national courts to investigate and prosecute individuals for the most heinous international crimes regardless of where the crime occurred, the nationality of the perpetrator, or the nationality of the victim. 

As of January 2, 2026, this principle functions as a critical “safety net” in the international justice system, particularly in situations where the territorial state is unable or unwilling to prosecute. 

Core Mechanisms and Scope

The “Enemy of All Mankind” Rationale: The legal basis for universal jurisdiction is the belief that certain crimes—specifically genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and torture—are so grave that they constitute an offense against all of humanity (hostes humani generis).

National Legislation: For a country to exercise this power, it must first adopt domestic laws that recognize these international crimes and authorize its courts to try them.

Decentralized Enforcement: Unlike the International Criminal Court (ICC), which has specific jurisdictional triggers (like being a state party), universal jurisdiction is decentralized and can be initiated by any state that has enacted the necessary legal framework. 

Conditions for Exercise

While “pure” universal jurisdiction requires no link at all, many states impose practical conditions:

Presence on Territory: Most countries will only initiate proceedings if the suspect is physically present on their territory.

Subsidiary Role: It is often used as a tool of last resort, invoked when other traditional bases of jurisdiction (territoriality or nationality) are unavailable. 

Recent Applications

Recent Applications and Trends (2025–2026)

Conflict-Related Use: Organizations like TRIAL International and Human Rights Watch actively use this principle to file complaints against suspected war criminals from global conflicts who travel to third countries.

Specialized Units: To manage the complexity of these cases, many nations (such as Germany and France) have established “War Crimes Units” with specialized investigators and prosecutors.

Accountability for 2023–2025 Events: As of early 2026, legal advocates are increasingly exploring universal jurisdiction to hold individuals from the current Israel-Hamas conflict accountable, especially in European countries with robust legal frameworks for extraterritorial crimes. For example, by late 2025, over 160 states had some level of legal capacity to exercise this jurisdiction over at least one core international crime. 

AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional.”

UNIVERSAL JURISDICTION COUNTRIES

Who are the countries to best handle applying universal jurisdiction in the Israel-Hamas conflict?

GoogleAI Mode: “Countries best equipped to handle universal jurisdiction cases in the Israel-Hamas conflict typically possess strong domestic legislation, specialized war crimes units, and a proven track record of successful prosecutions for international crimes.

Based on current legal practice and recent developments as of January 2, 2026, the following countries are considered particularly capable:

European Nations with Strong Frameworks 

These countries have robust legal systems, specialized units, and a history of successful universal jurisdiction cases, often focusing on the suspect’s presence on their territory: 

Germany: Germany has one of the world’s strongest “pure” universal jurisdiction laws, meaning it can prosecute grave international crimes even without a direct link to Germany. It has specialized war crimes units and has successfully prosecuted cases related to conflicts in Syria and elsewhere.

France: France is at the forefront of applying universal jurisdiction and has successfully issued arrest warrants and secured convictions in cases involving foreign conflicts, such as the Syrian regime. Its framework is complex but active.

Sweden: Sweden has a strong track record of using universal jurisdiction and has been among the first countries in Europe to prosecute and convict individuals for international crimes.

The Netherlands: Known for its proactive stance, the Netherlands has strong legal and institutional frameworks for investigating and prosecuting international crimes and has handled cases related to conflicts in Afghanistan, Rwanda, and Syria.

Switzerland: Switzerland has a history of pursuing universal jurisdiction cases and its judiciary is well-versed in the complexities of international law. 

Other Notable Jurisdictions

Argentina: Argentina stands out for having a “pure” universal jurisdiction clause in its constitution (Article 118) that allows for trials for crimes against public international law committed abroad. It has an activist history in pursuing such cases, particularly in Latin America, but its future use may depend on political will.

Belgium: Belgium has far-reaching legislation that has been used to open investigations related to the current conflict; for instance, a preliminary investigation was opened in late 2024 into a Belgian-Israeli national.

South Africa: While South Africa has primarily used the International Court of Justice (ICJ) route to address alleged genocide by Israel, it has also initiated its own domestic inquiry related to a specific incident using universal jurisdiction principles. 

These countries are the most likely venues for universal jurisdiction cases to be filed against individuals from both sides of the Israel-Hamas conflict (Israeli officials and Hamas members) if the suspects travel to their territories.”

THE INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK

Explain: International Framework: Sustained diplomacy within a multilateral framework, rather than unilateral impositions, is needed to ensure peace is grounded in international law and involves regional players.

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict as of January 2, 2026, an “International Framework” refers to a shift away from one-country mediation (like the U.S. acting alone) toward a collective, rule-based approach involving several nations and global institutions.

The goal is to ensure that any peace agreement is not just a “deal” between the strong and the weak, but a resolution anchored in International Law.

1. Multilateralism vs. Unilateralism

Unilateralism: This occurs when a single powerful nation (like the U.S.) leads negotiations. Critics argue this often results in “might makes right” solutions that favor the stronger party and ignore international legal standards, such as the illegality of settlements.

Multilateralism: This involves a “contact group” or a “coalition of the willing.” By 2026, this increasingly includes the European Union, the United Nations, and the Arab League, alongside traditional powers. This prevents any one nation from using its veto power to protect an ally from accountability.

2. Grounding Peace in International Law

A multilateral framework ensures that the “terms of the deal” are not up for negotiation if they violate established laws. This includes:

The Fourth Geneva Convention: Ensuring the protection of civilians and the illegality of transferring populations into occupied territory.

ICJ and ICC Rulings: In 2026, a multilateral framework uses the International Court of Justice’s rulings on genocide and the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrants as the baseline for negotiations. This means “peace” cannot be traded for “impunity.”

3. Involvement of Regional Players

For a solution to be sustainable, it must involve regional neighbors who have a direct stake in the outcome.

Security Guarantees: Countries like Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia provide the necessary security architecture to ensure a ceasefire holds.

Regional Integration: Organizations like the Arab League are essential for normalizing relations in exchange for a sovereign Palestinian state, as outlined in the Arab Peace Initiative.

4. Avoiding “Impositions”

The framework emphasizes that peace cannot be “imposed” by an outside power (like a peace plan written entirely in Washington or Brussels). Instead, it must be:

Consultative: Involving civil society from both sides.

Balanced: Ensuring that the rights of the occupied (Palestinians) are protected against the military and political power of the occupier (Israel), as mandated by the UN Charter.

Summary of the 2026 Perspective

As of today, international consensus holds that the “bilateral” approach (Israel and Palestinians talking alone) has failed because of the power imbalance. The International Framework acts as a “referee” that uses the rulebook of International Law to ensure that the final solution—whether two states or another model—provides equal rights and security for all people in the region.

AI responses may include mistakes. For legal advice, consult a professional.”

ARAB PEACE INITIATIVE (API)

Explain: Arab Peace Initiative

GoogleAI Mode: “The Arab Peace Initiative (API) is a comprehensive peace proposal first introduced by Saudi Arabia and unanimously adopted by the Arab League in 2002. It offers Israel full normalization of relations with the entire Arab and Muslim world in exchange for a resolution to the Palestinian conflict based on international law. 

As of January 2, 2026, the initiative remains the official collective stance of the 22 Arab League nations, though its implementation has been complicated by shifting regional dynamics and recent conflicts. 

Core Requirements and Exchange

The API operates on a “land-for-peace” principle. It requires Israel to withdraw from territories occupied in 1967, facilitate an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, and find a resolution for Palestinian refugees according to UN General Assembly Resolution 194. In return, Arab League and Organization of Islamic Cooperation nations would normalize relations with Israel. 

Evolution and Recent Developments

Amendments in 2013 allowed for minor land swaps. The 2020 Abraham Accords were seen by some as a departure from the API’s approach. Following recent conflicts, Arab states have reaffirmed the API as the basis for peace. A joint declaration in July 2025 by the Arab League and the EU supported the API’s two-state solution vision.”

THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION

What does API’s two-state solution vision look like?

GoogleAI Mode: “The Arab Peace Initiative (API) presents a specific “land-for-peace” vision for a two-state solution. As of January 2, 2026, this framework remains the core consensus of the 22-member Arab League, reinforced by recent international declarations like the July 2025 New York Declaration. 

The API’s two-state vision is defined by the following parameters:

1. Borders and Sovereignty

1967 Green Line: The vision calls for a full Israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied in 1967, including the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and the Syrian Golan Heights.

Territorial Modifications: Since 2013, the Arab League has officially accepted the principle of “minor, reciprocal and equal boundary modifications” (land swaps) if agreed upon by both parties, to account for major settlement blocs.

Sovereign Independence: It envisions a fully independent, sovereign Palestinian state living in peace alongside Israel. 

2. Jerusalem

Two Capitals: The vision specifically designates East Jerusalem as the capital of the sovereign State of Palestine.

Open Access: While partitioned politically, the vision (and subsequent modern interpretations like the 2025 New York Declaration) emphasizes that holy sites must remain open and accessible to all faiths. 

3. The Refugee Question

“Just and Agreed” Solution: The API calls for a “just and agreed” resolution to the Palestinian refugee problem based on UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

Negotiated Implementation: Crucially, the term “agreed” implies that the solution—whether it involves a right of return to Israel, resettlement in the Palestinian state, or financial compensation—must be mutually accepted by Israel. 

4. Security and Demilitarization

Limited Armament: The vision increasingly includes the concept of a sovereign but non-militarized (or “limited armament”) Palestinian state to address Israeli security concerns.

International Stabilization: Modern updates to this vision as of 2025/2026 include the deployment of an International Stabilization Force (ISF) or UN peacekeeping mission to manage security during a 15-month transition period. 

5. Regional Reward: Normalization

Collective Recognition: The unique “value proposition” of the API is that in exchange for these terms, all 22 Arab states and 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation would establish full, normal diplomatic and economic relations with Israel.

Ending Conflict: This would result in a formal “termination of all claims or states of belligerency” between Israel and the entire Arab world.”

LIMITED ARMAMENT

Explain: The vision increasingly includes the concept of a sovereign but non-militarized (or “limited armament”) Palestinian state to address Israeli security concerns.

GoogleAI Mode: “The concept of a “sovereign but non-militarized” Palestinian state is a strategic framework designed to balance the Palestinian demand for independence with Israel’s security requirements. As of January 2, 2026, this concept has been codified in the “Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict” (or the Gaza Peace Plan), which was signed in October 2025 and endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2803. 

Core Principles of Non-Militarization

Limitation of Armaments: Under this vision, the Palestinian state is recognized as sovereign but is prohibited from maintaining a traditional military or possessing “heavy weapons”.

Internal Security Focus: The state is permitted to maintain a vetted, professional civilian police force responsible only for internal law and order and counter-terrorism.

Demilitarization of Territories: The vision requires the permanent “decommissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups” (specifically targeting Hamas and Islamic Jihad) and the destruction of military infrastructure such as tunnels. 

Security Enforcement Mechanisms (2025–2026)

To ensure compliance and address Israeli security concerns without a permanent Israeli military presence, the plan introduces international oversight: 

International Stabilization Force (ISF): A U.S.-led multinational force authorized by the UN to oversee security, secure borders with Israel and Egypt, and facilitate the “permanent decommissioning of weapons”.

Phased IDF Withdrawal: Israeli military forces are scheduled to withdraw from territories based on “standards and milestones” linked to successful demilitarization, as verified by the ISF.

External Control: Even within a sovereign state, current frameworks often grant Israel or the ISF continued oversight of Palestinian airspace, maritime areas, and border crossings for a transitional period. 

Current Challenges and Perspectives

Hamas Resistance: As of early 2026, Hamas has officially rejected disarming, claiming that “resistance and its weapons” are a legitimate right as long as the occupation persists.

Arab League Stance: In a significant shift in July 2025, the Arab League and the EU jointly called for Hamas to hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority as part of the “New York Declaration,” explicitly linking Palestinian demilitarization to the objective of a sovereign state.

Board of Peace (BoP): Administrative oversight is currently managed by an international “Board of Peace,” which coordinates the reconstruction of Gaza and the transition to a technocratic Palestinian government.”

THE COUNTRIES INVOLVED TO HELP PEACE

Who are the countries and organizations that should be involved in establishing peace between Israel and Hamas?

GoogleAI Mode: “As of January 2, 2026, establishing a lasting peace between Israel and Hamas involves a complex multilateral framework of countries and international organizations. Following the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 2803 in November 2025, the international community has shifted toward a “peace enforcement” model led by several key actors. 

Key Mediators and Diplomatic Leaders

United States: Under the Trump administration, the U.S. remains the primary architect of the current 20-point Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict. Washington coordinates the “Peace Council” (expected to be chaired by Donald Trump) that oversees the transition.

Egypt and Qatar: These regional states continue to serve as the main intermediaries between Israel and Hamas leadership. They are essential for negotiating hostage releases and the “phased disarmament” of Hamas.

Turkey: Acting as a guarantor for Hamas, Turkey plays a leading role in diplomatic efforts and has expressed readiness to contribute to security forces. 

The International Stabilization Force (ISF)

Authorized by the UN in late 2025, the ISF is a multinational military body tasked with securing Gaza’s borders, overseeing demilitarization, and training a new Palestinian police force. 

Troop Contributors: Several nations have expressed readiness to deploy personnel, including Indonesia, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Turkey, and Italy.

Projected Mission: The U.S. aims for the first contingents to deploy by January 2026, with a total projected force of 20,000 personnel by the end of the year. 

International Organizations

The United Nations: While the ISF is not a traditional UN peacekeeping operation, the UN Security Council provides the legal mandate (Resolution 2803). UN agencies like the Office of the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process (UNSCO) continue to monitor humanitarian conditions.

The Arab League: In 2025, the 22-member Arab League issued a historic joint call for Hamas to disarm and relinquish power, marking a significant shift toward the international peace plan.

The European Union: The EU acts as a major funding partner for reconstruction and maintains pressure on Israel to uphold obligations regarding a two-state solution. 

Governance and Regional Partners

The Palestinian Authority (PA): The peace plan envisions a reformed PA eventually taking over governance of a unified Gaza and West Bank by the end of 2027.

Regional Guarantors: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Jordan, and Pakistan are listed as official “guarantors” of the ceasefire, providing both political legitimacy and reconstruction funding.”

WHAT ISRAEL & HAMAS NEED TO DO

What do Israel and Hamas need to do to cooperate with peace?

GoogleAI Mode: “To cooperate with the current internationally-backed peace process, primarily governed by the U.S.-led Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict (endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2803 in November 2025), both Israel and Hamas have specific, challenging requirements.

What Hamas Needs to Do

Hamas must agree to a process that effectively ends its existence as a military and governing body, which it has so far largely refused to do.

Release all remaining hostages: All remaining Israeli hostages, both alive and deceased, must be immediately and unconditionally released.

Disarm completely: Hamas and all other non-state armed groups must permanently decommission their weapons, destroy all military and offensive infrastructure (including tunnels), and halt the production of weapons. This process would be overseen by independent international monitors and the International Stabilization Force (ISF).

Relinquish governance: Hamas must surrender all governing authority in the Gaza Strip and cannot have any future role in the territory’s governance, directly or indirectly.

Amnesty or leave: Fighters who disarm can receive amnesty and an option to leave Gaza for a third country. Those who do not are subject to continued military action by the ISF or Israel. 

What Israel Needs to Do

Israel is required to facilitate humanitarian access, begin a phased military withdrawal, and cooperate with international bodies, although its withdrawal is conditional on the security situation.

Ensure unhindered humanitarian access: Israel must open all border crossings for the rapid delivery of massive amounts of humanitarian aid (food, water, medical supplies, fuel) and allow the rehabilitation of critical infrastructure without interference.

Cease military operations: The war must end with a lasting and durable ceasefire, with all offensive military operations suspended.

Phased troop withdrawal: The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) must withdraw completely from all populated areas of Gaza in phases, ceding control to the International Stabilization Force (ISF) and a new, vetted Palestinian police force. The pace of this withdrawal is linked to verified demilitarization milestones.

Release Palestinian prisoners: In exchange for the release of hostages, Israel must release a specified number of Palestinian prisoners, including women, children, and those serving life sentences.

Cooperate with international oversight: Israel must coordinate with the “Board of Peace” (chaired by the U.S.) and the ISF to ensure security and prevent the resurgence of threats, while respecting the eventual self-determination of the Palestinian people within the new framework.”

THE FIGHTERS: AMNESTY, EXILE & OBLITERATION

Explain: Fighters who disarm can receive amnesty and an option to leave Gaza for a third country. Those who do not are subject to continued military action by the ISF or Israel.

GoogleAI Mode: “This provision is a central element of the Comprehensive Plan to End the Gaza Conflict (the “Trump Peace Plan”), which was endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2803 in November 2025. 

It outlines a specific “disarm or be obliterated” framework for Hamas members that combines an offer of clemency with the threat of ultimate military force. 

1. Amnesty and Exile for Fighters

The plan offers a non-punitive exit for individual Hamas members as part of the “Phase 2” demilitarization of the Gaza Strip. 

The Amnesty Offer: Hamas members who return all hostages, decommission their weapons, and “commit to peaceful coexistence” are granted formal amnesty. This clemency is intended to encourage low-level fighters to abandon the group.

The Exile Option: For those who do not wish to remain in Gaza under a new governing authority, the plan provides for “safe passage” to accepting third-party countries.

No Forced Displacement: The plan explicitly states that no Palestinians will be forced to leave Gaza; the exile option is presented as a voluntary choice for disarmed members. 

2. Continued Military Action for Refusal 

The “alternative” to disarmament is the resumption of full-scale military operations until the group is destroyed. 

The Deadline: As of late December 2025, President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu have reportedly agreed on a two-month deadline for the complete destruction of Hamas’s military infrastructure, including its tunnel networks.

Role of the ISF: The newly authorized International Stabilization Force (ISF) is mandated by Resolution 2803 to “demilitarize Gaza by all means necessary,” which includes the use of force against groups that refuse to disarm.

Israeli Intervention: If Hamas fails to disarm within the deadline, the responsibility for “next steps” returns to the Israeli military, with the stated objective of “obliterating” the remaining threat. 

3. Current Implementation Status (January 2, 2026)

Hamas Rejection: As of early 2026, Hamas has officially denounced the plan, rejecting any disarmament until a Palestinian state is established and asserting its “right to resist occupation”.

Deadlock: While a ceasefire went into effect in October 2025, progress has stalled. Hamas remains in control of roughly 47% of Gaza, and its fighters show no signs of voluntary surrender or accepting the exile offer.

Decisive Year: The Israeli military has vowed that 2026 will be the “decisive year” for completing the disarmament of Gaza, whether through the international plan or continued military action.”

FROM THE QUR’AN (QURAN) TO HAMAS

Specifically to Hamas, what does the Qur’an (Quran) have to say to them (exclude Hadith)?

GoogleAI Mode: “While the Qur’an does not mention modern organizations by name, it contains specific mandates regarding the conduct of those who claim to act in the name of Islam. For a group like Hamas, which identifies as an “Islamic Resistance Movement” and cites the Qur’an as its constitution, the text offers both justification for resistance and strict boundaries for its execution. 

1. Mandate for Resistance

The Qur’an provides the religious basis used by Hamas to justify its armed struggle against occupation: 

Defense Against Expulsion: Permission to fight is explicitly given to those who have been “expelled from their homes without a just cause” (22:40).

Fighting Oppression: It commands believers to fight on behalf of the “oppressed among men, women, and children” who pray for rescue from a town of oppressors (4:75).

Retaliation: Verse 2:191 allows believers to “drive them out from where they have turned you out,” as it views persistent oppression as “worse than slaughter”. 

2. Prohibitions on Conduct

While the Qur’an permits defense, it sets “limits” that must not be overstepped. Modern scholars apply these verses to criticize actions such as the targeting of civilians:

No Aggression or Transgression: The foundational rule of combat is: “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Verily, Allah does not love transgressors” (2:190). Scholars interpret “transgression” as harming those not actively fighting.

Sanctity of Life: Verse 5:32 states that killing an innocent soul is equivalent to “killing all of mankind”. This principle allows no religious room for indiscriminate violence against non-combatants.

Impartial Justice: Conflict does not excuse injustice. Verse 5:8 commands: “Let not the hatred of a people move you to deviate from justice”. 

3. Treatment of Captives

The Qur’an provides a narrow set of options for those taken during war, which contemporary legal experts use to evaluate the holding of hostages:

Generosity or Ransom: Verse 47:4 dictates that once enemies are subdued, they should be bound firmly, but thereafter they must be released either through “generosity” (free release) or “ransom”.

Kindness to Prisoners: Captives must be treated humanely and fed “for the love of God,” with the righteous giving them the same food they love for themselves (76:8-9). 

4. Obligations to Peace

Responding to Peace Overtures: If an enemy “inclines toward peace,” the Qur’an mandates that the believer must also “incline to it” and trust in God (8:61).

Prohibition of Treachery: Deception and treachery in dealing with enemies are condemned (17:34). Once a covenant or promise is made, it must be fulfilled “even if it leads to a tactical disadvantage”.”

FROM THE QUR’AN (QURAN) TO ISRAEL

Specifically to Israel, what does the Qur’an (Quran) have to say to them (exclude Hadith)?

GoogleAI Mode: “In the Qur’an, the address to “Israel”—primarily under the name Bani Isra’il (Children of Israel)—is one of the most frequent and detailed narratives. It contains a mixture of divine honors, specific legal commandments, and stern warnings about their conduct and relationship with God. 

1. Reminders of Divine Favor 

The Qur’an explicitly addresses the Children of Israel to remind them of their unique status in history. 

A Chosen People: God repeatedly tells them, “O Children of Israel, remember My favor which I bestowed upon you and that I preferred you over the worlds” (2:47, 2:122).

Deliverance: The text recounts their rescue from the tyranny of Pharaoh and the miracles granted to them, such as the parting of the sea and the provision of “manna and quails” in the desert (20:80, 2:57). 

2. The Covenant and Commandments

The Qur’an outlines a specific “covenant” (mithaq) made with the Children of Israel, which includes both moral and religious duties. 

Moral Code: They were commanded to worship only God, be kind to parents and relatives, care for orphans and the needy, speak kindly to people, and maintain prayer and charity (2:83).

Prohibition of Violence: A specific part of their covenant was the command: “Shed not your blood, nor turn your selves out of your dwellings” (2:84). The text criticizes those who violated this by killing their own people and expelling them from their homes (2:85).

Sanctity of Life: The Qur’an notes that because of past transgressions, God “decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul… it is as if he had slain mankind entirely” (5:32). 

3. Connection to the Land

The Qur’an addresses the Children of Israel regarding the “Holy Land” (al-Ard al-Muqaddasah). 

Divine Assignment: Moses told his people to “enter the Holy Land which Allah has assigned to you” (5:21).

Condition of Righteousness: Inheritance of the land is often presented as conditional. The Qur’an states that God’s covenant does not “embrace the transgressors” (2:124) and that only “righteous servants” shall truly inherit the land (21:105).

A Future Gathering: Surah Al-Isra (17:104) records a command for them to “dwell in the land” until the “promise of the Hereafter” comes, when God will bring them all together in a “mingled crowd”. 

4. Warnings against Arrogance and Corruption

The Qur’an contains strong warnings addressed specifically to the lineage of Israel regarding their behavioral patterns. 

Two Instances of Corruption: Verse 17:4 prophesies that they would cause “corruption in the land twice” and become “extremely arrogant”.

Cycle of Punishment: The text warns that if they return to corruption or sin, God will return to punishment (17:8). This is presented as a lesson for them to maintain humility and avoid the “haughtiness” that leads to divine displeasure.

Accountability: They are cautioned not to “exchange the signs of God for a small price” or to “conceal the truth” while they know it (2:41-42).”

ENDING CONFLICT: TERMINATION OF ALL CLAIMS

Explain: Ending Conflict: This would result in a formal “termination of all claims or states of belligerency” between Israel and the entire Arab world.

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the Arab Peace Initiative (API) and current diplomatic frameworks as of January 2, 2026, the “termination of all claims or states of belligerency” represents the ultimate legal and political “endgame” of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

It is the final step in a reciprocal exchange: in return for the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state, the Arab world formally closes the book on over 75 years of war with Israel. 

1. The Legal Meaning: Ending “Belligerency” 

In international law, a “state of belligerency” means that two or more parties are legally at war, even if they are not currently shooting. 

Finality: Terminating this status means that Arab nations would no longer view Israel as an “enemy state.”

Legal Standing: It would officially end the Arab League’s boycott of Israel and cancel any legal claims regarding past conflicts.

Mutual Recognition: Both sides would recognize each other’s “right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries, free from threats or acts of force,” as outlined in the Arab Peace Initiative. 

2. “Termination of All Claims”

This is a specific clause intended to prevent the conflict from resurfacing. It means that once the peace deal is signed: 

No Further Territorial Demands: The Arab states and the Palestinian state would have no further claims on land within the recognized borders of Israel.

Finality of Refugee Status: It would provide a “just and agreed” solution to the refugee issue, after which no further reparations or “right of return” claims could be legally pursued against Israel.

Security Guarantees: Countries like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan would act as guarantors that no non-state actors (like remnants of armed groups) would use their territories to launch claims or attacks against Israel. 

3. Collective Normalization

This is the “regional reward” that sets the API apart from previous bilateral peace treaties (like those with Egypt or Jordan). 

The 22-State Peace: Instead of making peace with one neighbor at a time, Israel would receive a collective peace from all 22 members of the Arab League and 57 members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

Full Integration: This would include the establishment of full diplomatic relations, the exchange of ambassadors, and the opening of trade, tourism, and direct flights across the entire region. 

4. Current Status (January 2, 2026)

As of early 2026, this “termination of claims” is the cornerstone of the New York Declaration (July 2025). 

The Saudi Stance: Saudi Arabia has reiterated that it will not sign a normalization deal—and thus will not terminate its state of belligerency—until there is a “credible, irreversible path” to a Palestinian state.

Hamas and the “End of Claims”: A major hurdle in 2026 remains whether Palestinian factions like Hamas would accept a “finality of claims” clause, as it would mean legally renouncing any further armed struggle for territory within Israel’s 1967 borders.”

PROTECTION & OPEN ACCESS TO HOLY SITES

Explain: Open Access: While partitioned politically, the vision (and subsequent modern interpretations like the 2025 New York Declaration) emphasizes that holy sites must remain open and accessible to all faiths. 

GoogleAI Mode: “In the context of the July 2025 New York Declaration, Open Access is a diplomatic framework designed to ensure that Jerusalem’s religious sites remain universally accessible even if the city itself is politically divided between two sovereign states. 

This vision addresses the primary religious and historical tensions in Jerusalem through several key principles:

1. Upholding the “Status Quo”

Legal Preservation: The declaration calls for maintaining the “legal and historical Status Quo” at Islamic and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem.

Jordanian Custodianship: It reaffirms the essential role of the Hashemite Custodianship (Jordan) in managing these sites, specifically supporting the Jordan-run Jerusalem Awqaf and Al-Aqsa Mosque Affairs Department. 

2. Freedom of Worship

Universal Liberty: The framework mandates that full religious liberty and human rights must be safeguarded for all persons without distinction.

Protection of Sites: International responsibility is invoked to ensure the physical protection of holy places, religious buildings, and sites, guaranteeing that they do not become targets or barriers during political transitions. 

3. Political Partition vs. Religious Unity

Two Capitals, One City: While the 2025 vision supports East Jerusalem as the capital of a sovereign Palestinian state based on 1967 lines, it envisions an “open Jerusalem”.

Accessibility for All: The model emphasizes “equal freedoms, including for movement and residency,” ensuring that Jews, Muslims, and Christians can access their respective holy sites regardless of which side of the political border those sites fall on. 

4. International Guarantees (2026 Perspective)

Monitoring Mechanisms: As of early 2026, modern peace plans propose international monitoring to verify that neither side restricts access to these sites.

De-escalation of Conflict: By removing religious sites from the “exclusive control” of one national identity, the Open Access vision seeks to neutralize the Al-Aqsa Mosque (Temple Mount) and other sites as flashpoints for regional violence.”