Gaza - Saba:
The Zionist occupier and its American backer would never have dared to make disarming the resistance a condition for stopping the war on Gaza unless they had realized that these weapons are the insurmountable obstacle to advancing their project—a project they have failed to complete over seven decades, despite possessing the most advanced and lethal weapons.
Today, they see their real problem in the modest arms of the resistance. Yet these simple weapons draw strength from the unshakable belief in the victory of the rightful and the inevitable downfall of the occupier.
It is this very strength that has rendered the occupier powerless in Gaza for nearly 18 months, failing to achieve any victory—starting with the liberation of its captives.
Given this reality—and in the face of the Zionist enemy’s insistence on linking a ceasefire to the complete elimination of the Palestinian resistance and its disarmament—the resistance’s stance has been decisive: What the occupation failed to achieve through displacement and the subjugation of the Palestinian people in Gaza under thousands of tons of missiles and shells will also fail in the face of the resistance’s steadfastness in holding onto its weapons and its right to resist the occupier.
Amid mounting pressure to disarm the Palestinian resistance as a condition for ending the ongoing war on Gaza, the resistance factions have sent a strong message of defiance to the Zionist entity and its American supporter: There will be no negotiations leading to the surrender of their arms.
In official statements and press releases over the past hours, the resistance has rejected any discussion by the occupation or mediators regarding disarming the resistance, denouncing such attempts.
In this context, the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas stated: The Zionist enemy’s demand for the resistance’s withdrawal from Gaza, along with its disarmament, is an American scheme aimed at stripping the resistance of its leverage—the captives—paving the way for implementing U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to empty Gaza and completely displace its population.
Suhail Al-Hindi, a member of Hamas’s Political Bureau, emphasized in a press statement: "The resistance’s terms are non-negotiable: a complete halt to the genocide, a full withdrawal of occupation forces from Gaza, and any new proposals that ignore these terms are doomed to fail."
He affirmed that "the weapons of the Resistance are non-negotiable; we adhere to our people's legitimate right to resist occupation by all means until liberation and return."
In turn, Sami Abu Zuhri, head of the political bureau of Hamas abroad, stated, "Disarming the Resistance is not up for discussion and will not be achieved. The weapons of the Resistance will remain as long as the occupation persists, because they exist to protect our people and our national rights."
Similarly, Ahmed Abu Al-Sa’ad, a member of the Political Bureau of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), emphasized that "the weapons of the Resistance are an exclusive right of our people and are not subject to any negotiation or discussion."
In press statements, Abu Al-Sa’ad said, "No rational person, whether inside or outside the Resistance, would agree to surrender weapons and leave our people defenseless. Therefore, it is self-evident that the weapons are beyond any discussion, talk, or negotiation."
He explained, "The existence of our Palestinian people is rooted in their adherence to their weapons and their right to resist, determining their own destiny like other nations of the world."
Additionally, the Resistance Committees in Palestine confirmed that the Resistance is open to any proposal that ends the war, provided that Zionist forces withdraw and reconstruction proceeds without restrictions. However, they categorically rejected any discussion about surrendering the weapons of the Resistance, considering it "a fundamental right of our people that is non-negotiable."
In a statement, the Committees asserted that the Zionist enemy's inclusion of the disarmament of the Resistance in ceasefire proposals "aims to disrupt and sabotage negotiations," indicating that this "proves the enemy's unwillingness to reach an agreement that ensures an end to the war and the release of prisoners."
The Resistance Committees stressed that "the weapons of the Resistance are a red line," stating: "It is a fundamental right of our people, linked to ending the occupation and liberating the land and holy sites, and we will not relinquish it." They added, "We will thwart the delusions of the Zionist enemy and its American ally, and we will not allow the imposition of terms through coercion and destruction."
As for the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), its Political Bureau member, Samir Abu Medleleh, emphasized the Palestinian people's right to bear arms and defend their land and dignity, a right guaranteed under international law and the right of peoples to self-determination.
In press statements, he added: "We are not talking about regular armies, but about a unified popular resistance, and its weapons are legitimate tools in the hands of our people to defend themselves against occupation, not instruments of aggression."
Abu Medleleh clarified that any call to surrender weapons at this stage is a call for surrender, prolonging the war, destruction, and further targeting of civilians. He added that the Resistance is unified, and the Palestinian people reject displacement.
Similarly, the Palestinian National and Islamic Forces Follow-Up Committee rejected the proposal conveyed by the Egyptian mediator, which includes disarming the Resistance in Gaza. They affirmed that the weapons are for self-defense and that any truce that does not include real guarantees would be a political trap that entrenches the occupation rather than resisting it.
In a statement issued by the Committee, which includes several factions, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the Committee confirmed that "the weapons of the Resistance are a red line and are not subject to negotiation." They stated that discussing this issue at this stage is merely an attempt to circumvent the rights of the Palestinian people and mislead international public opinion.
Amid these pressures, political analysts noted that reintroducing the idea of disarming the Resistance in Gaza as a condition for ending the war is a fantasy. The realities on the ground and the long history of Palestinian resistance reveal the impossibility of imposing this demand on a people fighting for their freedom.
Political analyst Hazem Ayyad told "Quds Press" that "surrendering weapons is not in the lexicon of the Resistance, as it would mean not only its defeat but the defeat of the entire Palestinian people." Thus, calls to disarm Gaza are nothing but an attempt to weaken the last remaining cards of strength held by the Palestinian people.
This was echoed by Dr. Areej Jabr, a political science professor specializing in Palestinian affairs, who stated in an interview with the same source: "The idea of liberating Palestinian lands can only be achieved through armed resistance, not through concessions and negotiations that have only expanded the Zionist project." She stressed that "the Palestinian Resistance cannot accept any alleviation for civilians unless it serves the Palestinian national project first, as any concession at this stage would be a fatal blow to the Palestinian cause."
The Zionist occupier and its American backer would never have dared to make disarming the resistance a condition for stopping the war on Gaza unless they had realized that these weapons are the insurmountable obstacle to advancing their project—a project they have failed to complete over seven decades, despite possessing the most advanced and lethal weapons.
Today, they see their real problem in the modest arms of the resistance. Yet these simple weapons draw strength from the unshakable belief in the victory of the rightful and the inevitable downfall of the occupier.
It is this very strength that has rendered the occupier powerless in Gaza for nearly 18 months, failing to achieve any victory—starting with the liberation of its captives.
Given this reality—and in the face of the Zionist enemy’s insistence on linking a ceasefire to the complete elimination of the Palestinian resistance and its disarmament—the resistance’s stance has been decisive: What the occupation failed to achieve through displacement and the subjugation of the Palestinian people in Gaza under thousands of tons of missiles and shells will also fail in the face of the resistance’s steadfastness in holding onto its weapons and its right to resist the occupier.
Amid mounting pressure to disarm the Palestinian resistance as a condition for ending the ongoing war on Gaza, the resistance factions have sent a strong message of defiance to the Zionist entity and its American supporter: There will be no negotiations leading to the surrender of their arms.
In official statements and press releases over the past hours, the resistance has rejected any discussion by the occupation or mediators regarding disarming the resistance, denouncing such attempts.
In this context, the Islamic Resistance Movement Hamas stated: The Zionist enemy’s demand for the resistance’s withdrawal from Gaza, along with its disarmament, is an American scheme aimed at stripping the resistance of its leverage—the captives—paving the way for implementing U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan to empty Gaza and completely displace its population.
Suhail Al-Hindi, a member of Hamas’s Political Bureau, emphasized in a press statement: "The resistance’s terms are non-negotiable: a complete halt to the genocide, a full withdrawal of occupation forces from Gaza, and any new proposals that ignore these terms are doomed to fail."
He affirmed that "the weapons of the Resistance are non-negotiable; we adhere to our people's legitimate right to resist occupation by all means until liberation and return."
In turn, Sami Abu Zuhri, head of the political bureau of Hamas abroad, stated, "Disarming the Resistance is not up for discussion and will not be achieved. The weapons of the Resistance will remain as long as the occupation persists, because they exist to protect our people and our national rights."
Similarly, Ahmed Abu Al-Sa’ad, a member of the Political Bureau of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), emphasized that "the weapons of the Resistance are an exclusive right of our people and are not subject to any negotiation or discussion."
In press statements, Abu Al-Sa’ad said, "No rational person, whether inside or outside the Resistance, would agree to surrender weapons and leave our people defenseless. Therefore, it is self-evident that the weapons are beyond any discussion, talk, or negotiation."
He explained, "The existence of our Palestinian people is rooted in their adherence to their weapons and their right to resist, determining their own destiny like other nations of the world."
Additionally, the Resistance Committees in Palestine confirmed that the Resistance is open to any proposal that ends the war, provided that Zionist forces withdraw and reconstruction proceeds without restrictions. However, they categorically rejected any discussion about surrendering the weapons of the Resistance, considering it "a fundamental right of our people that is non-negotiable."
In a statement, the Committees asserted that the Zionist enemy's inclusion of the disarmament of the Resistance in ceasefire proposals "aims to disrupt and sabotage negotiations," indicating that this "proves the enemy's unwillingness to reach an agreement that ensures an end to the war and the release of prisoners."
The Resistance Committees stressed that "the weapons of the Resistance are a red line," stating: "It is a fundamental right of our people, linked to ending the occupation and liberating the land and holy sites, and we will not relinquish it." They added, "We will thwart the delusions of the Zionist enemy and its American ally, and we will not allow the imposition of terms through coercion and destruction."
As for the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP), its Political Bureau member, Samir Abu Medleleh, emphasized the Palestinian people's right to bear arms and defend their land and dignity, a right guaranteed under international law and the right of peoples to self-determination.
In press statements, he added: "We are not talking about regular armies, but about a unified popular resistance, and its weapons are legitimate tools in the hands of our people to defend themselves against occupation, not instruments of aggression."
Abu Medleleh clarified that any call to surrender weapons at this stage is a call for surrender, prolonging the war, destruction, and further targeting of civilians. He added that the Resistance is unified, and the Palestinian people reject displacement.
Similarly, the Palestinian National and Islamic Forces Follow-Up Committee rejected the proposal conveyed by the Egyptian mediator, which includes disarming the Resistance in Gaza. They affirmed that the weapons are for self-defense and that any truce that does not include real guarantees would be a political trap that entrenches the occupation rather than resisting it.
In a statement issued by the Committee, which includes several factions, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the Committee confirmed that "the weapons of the Resistance are a red line and are not subject to negotiation." They stated that discussing this issue at this stage is merely an attempt to circumvent the rights of the Palestinian people and mislead international public opinion.
Amid these pressures, political analysts noted that reintroducing the idea of disarming the Resistance in Gaza as a condition for ending the war is a fantasy. The realities on the ground and the long history of Palestinian resistance reveal the impossibility of imposing this demand on a people fighting for their freedom.
Political analyst Hazem Ayyad told "Quds Press" that "surrendering weapons is not in the lexicon of the Resistance, as it would mean not only its defeat but the defeat of the entire Palestinian people." Thus, calls to disarm Gaza are nothing but an attempt to weaken the last remaining cards of strength held by the Palestinian people.
This was echoed by Dr. Areej Jabr, a political science professor specializing in Palestinian affairs, who stated in an interview with the same source: "The idea of liberating Palestinian lands can only be achieved through armed resistance, not through concessions and negotiations that have only expanded the Zionist project." She stressed that "the Palestinian Resistance cannot accept any alleviation for civilians unless it serves the Palestinian national project first, as any concession at this stage would be a fatal blow to the Palestinian cause."
