Context: CNN | Arab states call on Hamas to disarm and relinquish power in unprecedented move
YES resolution requires meaningful disarmament and relinquishing of power by Hamas, but it does not need to be purely voluntary or total.
If most of Hamas leadership is removed (e.g. by Israeli force) and a remaining Hamas figure or spokesperson announces disarmament, that could count as YES — as long as the action appears substantive and credible.
The disarmament must be real, not just symbolic — and should appear to satisfy the demands of Arab states who called for disarmament.
I would likely wait 1–2 weeks after any such announcement, and look for on-the-ground signs that it’s genuine — e.g.:
Surrender of weapons
Ceasefire compliance
Israel relaxing restrictions, allowing aid or journalist access, etc.
Fringe militant holdouts (e.g. groups like PIJ or Jenin Brigades) do not disqualify a YES resolution, as long as Hamas itself is credibly disarmed and no longer in control.
Update 2025-08-07 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Important clarification on succession scenarios:
If Israel removes most of Hamas by force and a new group takes charge in Gaza, it would NOT count as YES even if the new group disarms - this would be considered a defeat of Hamas, not Hamas relinquishing power
Exception: If the new group is essentially a reformed version of Hamas (e.g., "Hamas 2.0" or "new age Hamas" with mostly the same people who overthrow the original Hamas leadership), this could resolve YES
Resolution requires a meaningful act of disarmament from Hamas as an organization, recognized by others as a voluntary relinquishment of control
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ544 | |
| 2 | Ṁ307 | |
| 3 | Ṁ160 | |
| 4 | Ṁ120 | |
| 5 | Ṁ116 |
People are also trading
I could have left it closed/unresolved for a while to allow for arguing on the edges here, but this market reached its deadline. The call for disarmament that this market was based on was over a year ago, and 1 year was the given timeline.
The market closed today, and I didn't want to leave this market open for people to stumble upon it, thinking that the announcement was going to be enough for a YES. In my mind, it is clearly a NO based on the initial conditions, but after review I am not so sure, if in 1-2 weeks Hamas is entirely disarmed, I will consider reresolving.
Maybe I should unresolve it now and leave it closed, but I feel like this market has basically ~no chance of resolving YES.
For now, please bet here instead for a longer timeline:
But Hamas didn’t actually disarm. So why is this resolved. A vague potential "plan" was announced by Trump via his "Truth" social post. There is no actual details of the plan especially timeline of plan to be carried out. Hamas said they would disarm under conditions of stages with first step is Israel abide to the ceasefire agreement & stop the killing/attacks, once Israel withdraws from Gaza which they won’t do anytime soon (or really ever) with their election coming up & rebuilding/establishing a Palestinian state which again Israel no matter who takes over their government would ever ever agree to that.
This should be resolved to NO cuz obviously won’t happen today or the question should have been worded to will Hamas agree to disarm in July which would be resolved either No or 50/50 since they placed conditions to do so
@DevdaDavid Today was the deadline / close date - see my comment above. It maybe wasn't very clear, and might be premature
This is not an official message. It contradicts what other Hamas members said in the past.
But I still think it is relevant as a sign of a possible trend within Hamas.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/hamas-source-says-group-relinquishing-control-of-gaza/
@MiguelLM I believe relinquishing power without disarming still counts as NO
CNN | Arab states call on Hamas to disarm and relinquish power in unprecedented move
Will Hamas cede control?
@Gen If Israel removes Hamas by force and they are out of power, but maybe have a few arms and are like PIJ or the Jenin Brigades, does that count as YES or is that still NO? You need Hamas to VOLUNTARILY agree to this by the end of July 2026 to resolve YES?
@nathanwei If we run a scenario where Israel manages to kill 90% of Hamas leadership and then the last guy's 7th cousin says they're disarming, that would still count, but it would have to be a meaningful disarmament from a leader in Hamas, with real disarmament that appeases the neighbouring Arab states.
In real terms, I'd probably wait about a week or two after such an announcement and if there were very real steps taking place to disarm people in Gaza, and there was very real changes on the Israel side (e.g. relaxing some restrictions such that aid can flow freely, journalist access, or whatever) then I'd comfortably resolve it YES even if there were fringe groups who were refusing to disarm and also refusing to cooperate with the Palestinian leadership (akin to the Jenin Brigades)
Thanks for helping me think this through, I have updated the description -- if you think it needs more refining we can continue to discuss, it seems reasonable to me tho
@nathanwei alternatively, if Israel eradicates 90% of Hamas, there are still people calling themselves Hamas, and a new group comes forward and takes charge in Gaza -- it wouldn't count for them to then disarm the region. In that case, I believe that would be a defeat of Hamas, not Hamas themselves relinquishing power and disarming.
In more complex edge cases (e.g. the group that steps up to replace Hamas is identical in ideology to Hamas) I would still probably say that this is a defeat of Hamas. Unless there is a meaningful act of disarmament from Hamas as an organization, recognized by others as a voluntary relinquishment of control, I'll resolve NO.
In a super-super-edge case of the new group being called "literally Hamas 2.0", then maybe it could resolve YES? e.g. they form "new age Hamas" which has a different set of rules but contains mostly the same people who decide to overthrow the Hamas1.0 leadership and disarm the region, then that should be a YES.