Kushner's visit to Netanyahu deepens Gaza's frustration over deadlocked talks

The lengthy meeting between US envoy Jared Kushner and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday has deepened frustration in Gaza, where Palestinians see negotiations over the ceasefire's next phase as trapped in a cycle of disputes over Hamas's weapons, Israeli withdrawal and promises of reconstruction.

The meeting lasted about eight hours and included Israeli officials and representatives of the so-called "Board of Peace", Israeli media outlets reported.

Netanyahu's office claimed in a press statement that the talks ended with an agreement to establish two working groups, one focusing on the disarmament of Gaza and another on sanitation, water and public health.

While Netanyahu's office described the discussions as "constructive and in-depth", many Palestinians saw little to suggest that the meeting would resolve the issues preventing the transition to the next phase of the supposed ceasefire.

Kushner met a Hamas delegation in Cairo before traveling to Israel. He said Hamas leaders "said all the right things" but emphasised Washington would judge them by their actions, not words.

He said disarmament progress could start in 30 days, with the US aiming for weapon removal and tunnel destruction in 60-90 days. Washington will not allow Gaza to rebuild until disarmament is done, but Israel retains the right to self-defence against perceived threats.

For Gaza residents, such timelines are disconnected from the daily reality of displacement, destroyed homes and shortages of basic necessities.

Reconstruction remains hostage

The central concern for many Palestinians is no longer how Hamas's weapons will be handled, but whether the political process can deliver a permanent end to Israel's violence, remove an Israeli occupation, and begin meaningful reconstruction.

"Kushner's meeting with Netanyahu offered little hope to families still struggling to survive," Radi Abu Afash, a father of six from Gaza City, told The New Arab.

"People in Gaza want to see results on the ground, not another series of statements and promises," he said, adding that his priority was for his children to live safely and have access to food, water and healthcare.

Abu Afash said that Palestinians were following the negotiations with concern because Israeli demands appeared to be dominating the process, while the needs of Gaza's population were pushed aside.

Salah Abu Hasira, who lives in a tent on Gaza City's beach after losing all his brothers and three of his sons, told TNA that the political discussions had become increasingly disconnected from the reality facing Palestinians.

His family, he said, had already paid an enormous price during the war. Any political initiative would mean little unless it brought a tangible improvement to people's lives.

"What Palestinians need now is an end to their suffering, dignified shelter, rebuilt homes and a future for children who have lost their parents and relatives," he added.

He said that the absence of Palestinian voices from high-level discussions reinforced the feeling that decisions about Gaza's future were being made without its residents.

For Samira Ayoub, also from Gaza City, the political debate comes amid the burden of caring for around 15 grandchildren after losing four of her children during the war.

Ayoub told TNA that the loss of her children had transformed her life, leaving her responsible for her grandchildren while living through extremely difficult conditions.

"Gaza's families can no longer endure more waiting," she said. "People who have lost their children, homes and livelihoods need concrete steps to restore security and stability."

"Palestinians wanted more than an agreement on paper: they wanted children to return to school, families to secure food and water, and survivors to rebuild their lives," she added.

A wider crisis

Frustration has grown with each new round of meetings that produces fresh working groups and deadlines without visible changes in Gaza.

Taysir Abdullah, a Gaza-based political analyst, told TNA that the expectations that Hamas would surrender its weapons completely and immediately were unrealistic.

He argued that Hamas could manoeuvre, delay, and adjust its positions but unlikely to take a step that could undermine its political and organisational existence. As an ideological movement deriving strength from its resistance identity, publicly surrendering its weapons could be seen as an admission of defeat.

Abdullah said Hamas might accept a gradual disarmament if conditions protect its political and symbolic standing, such as avoiding footage of weapons handovers, extending the process, and using a non-Israeli or non-American mediator.

He believes Hamas is relying partly on time, Turkish and Qatari political support and possible changes in Israel's political landscape, particularly ahead of elections.

Mustafa Ibrahim, another political analyst, takes a more pessimistic view. He describes the current proposals as "cosmetic concessions" that could restore aspects of daily life in Gaza without addressing the underlying political crisis.

Allowing limited sanitation, water and infrastructure projects, Ibrahim says, could reflect Israel's concern over the humanitarian and health consequences of Gaza's devastation rather than a genuine move towards ending the blockade or occupation.

"The danger is that these concessions become a substitute for a political solution," he added, warning against treating Gaza merely as a humanitarian, health and security problem requiring containment.

Political analyst Esmat Mansour, meanwhile, believes Hamas's acceptance of a disarmament process, regardless of how it is ultimately implemented, represents a significant strategic shift.

He argues that Hamas's adherence to the agreement could serve its interests as the confrontation moves from the military arena to the political and diplomatic one.

With Palestinians lacking sufficient leverage to impose their demands by force, Mansour believes the movement must rely on Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, the United States and international pressure to push Israel towards implementing the agreement.

Israel blocks next phase

Amid the uncertainty, Palestinian factions met in Cairo on Monday, including Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and the Democratic Reform Movement.

Hamas said its political bureau chief, Khalil al-Hayya, briefed the factions on meetings with Egyptian officials, mediators and guarantors in El Alamein, as well as subsequent discussions on the roadmap for the second phase of the ceasefire agreement.

The factions noted Israel was obstructing the transition to the second phase, accusing the government of reneging on understandings reached during the first phase and continuing violations.

They also discussed efforts to halt what they described as escalating aggression and prevent Gaza from becoming a casualty of Israel's political and electoral struggles, while accelerating relief, recovery and reconstruction.

Israeli media, citing political sources, reported that Netanyahu insisted during his meeting with Kushner on maintaining the Israeli army's freedom of action in Gaza. The meeting reportedly included the Shin Bet chief and the head of Military Intelligence, who presented what Israel described as evidence of Hamas violations.

Trump, meanwhile, said it would be better if Israel did not attack Gaza again, remarks welcomed by Hamas, which urged the US president to pressure the Israeli government to honour the understandings reached for the second phase.

For Palestinians, however, the contradiction remains stark: Washington is pressing for progress while Israel continues to insist on security conditions and freedom of military action.