A senior editor at a Saudi daily has warned that Hamas has little choice but to lay down its arms and hand them over soon, or risk far worse consequences. In a column, the editor, A-Malik, argued that the October 7 attack hurt the Palestinian cause and that the recent plan to end the fighting offers no clear gains for Palestinians, such as a state or full self-rule.
A-Malik wrote that after two years of war, which he says cost many Palestinian lives and destroyed much of Hamas’s leadership and support, the group now faces a harsh reality on the ground. He said Israel succeeded in several aims: reducing Iran’s regional reach, weakening Hezbollah’s influence in Lebanon, and gaining control or influence in parts of Syria. Given these shifts, the editor wrote, Hamas stands isolated and should surrender and disarm even if that feels humiliating.
The column reviewed a peace plan that A-Malik said largely favors Israel. He said the plan calls for the simultaneous release of 20 living hostages, the return of bodies for those killed, and the disarming of Hamas while barring the group from any role in running Gaza. In return, the plan would see fewer than 2,000 Palestinian prisoners freed, some of whom may be expelled from Palestinian areas. A-Malik pointed out that Israel kept the right to choose which prisoners to release from lists given by Hamas, and would keep security forces in buffer zones and the power to close crossings and limit the flow of goods.
A-Malik said the plan did not promise a clear path to Palestinian statehood or the right to self-determination. Instead, it speaks in general terms about both peoples living in peace, enjoying basic rights and security. He described those phrases as vague and warned that the October 7 attack had set back hopes for a Palestinian state.
Writing about the wider fallout, A-Malik said the war had “all but eliminated” Hamas’s leadership, its external backers and much of its armed capacity. He argued that the movement has lost external support and now sits besieged in a small area of Gaza. Given that situation, he urged Hamas to surrender and hand over weapons before a larger disaster hits the group.
The editor also credited Israel, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in particular, with changing the balance in the region. He wrote that Israel had made gains across several fronts and had “shattered Iran’s nuclear dreams.” A-Malik concluded that the peace plan reflects an American-Israeli view of peace that seeks to end Hamas’s future role in Gaza, and that this is a firm decision the group must take seriously.
The column is likely to stir debate across the region. Supporters of the editor’s view say disarming Hamas is a condition for lasting calm and reconstruction. Critics say any peace must include clear political rights and protections for Palestinians, including a viable path to statehood. Whatever the view, A-Malik’s message is clear: he sees little room for Hamas to resist the pressure and calls on the group to act quickly to avoid harsher outcomes.
