France’s foreign minister has declared that Hamas must accept surrender under the Gaza peace plan proposed by Donald Trump, asserting the group has lost its fight. Jean-Noël Barrot said that Hamas has a “very heavy responsibility” for Gaza’s suffering and must yield to a new leadership framework. His comments stress that any path forward must exclude Hamas from governance roles.
Barrot emphasized that Hamas’s resistance tactics aggravated civilian suffering, and that reconciliation must begin with recognition of defeat. He cited a recent United Nations resolution demanding that Hamas be barred from a future Palestinian state’s leadership. For Barrot, Hamas losing its war means it has no choice but to surrender in line with the plan.
However, Hamas responded cautiously. The group welcomed calls for a ceasefire and exchange of hostages, but stopped short of full surrender. It insisted that any compliance depends on guarantees of safe withdrawal, open borders for aid, and a staged Israeli pullback. Its statement calls for negotiation over final terms, including the administration of Gaza and security oversight.
Moreover, Barrot’s stance echoes positions voiced by other Western leaders. Allies such as the U.S. and EU have increasingly advocated that Gaza’s administration shift to technocratic or neutral authorities. His words heighten pressure on Hamas to engage in meaningful compromise. They also signal France’s alignment with broader diplomatic efforts.
Meanwhile, the proposal faces strong internal critique within Palestinian politics. Some factions view calls for surrender as unrealistic and undermining Palestinian agency. They argue that loss of control over Gaza’s future invites external domination. Gaza-based leaders fear loss of legitimacy if they concede too much.
In addition, Barrot defended France’s own record on antisemitism while making these statements. He noted that condemning Israeli policy does not equate to hostility toward Jews. His comment seeks to separate criticism of warfare from religious or ethnic hatred. He insisted that France upholds both free debate and protection from hate.
Also, analysts warn that insisting on surrender could backfire. When one side loses face, it may double down on resistance or turn to asymmetric tactics. The plan’s success depends on how surrender is framed—as a condition or as a transition. If mishandled, it may deepen conflict rather than resolve it.
Finally, as Hamas must accept surrender becomes a repeated demand by foreign officials, the dynamics in Gaza may shift drastically. The next steps will test whether Hamas relents or rejects, and whether international guarantees can make surrender politically viable. The world watches closely as the fate of Gaza hinges on complex diplomacy and demands for accountability.
About The Author
