This post is also available in:
English 
Русский (Russian)
Short answer
When Hamas, Qatar, and Turkey talk about a hudna (هدنة), they mean a temporary truce, a short tactical timeout, not salam (peace) or sulh (reconciliation), as the Western understanding of a ceasefire would suggest. The term comes straight from Islamic history and ideology: the Prophet Muhammad agreed to a ten-year hudna with Mecca, and conquered it two years later. Perfectly acceptable, according to classical Islamic jurisprudence. It’s a tactic designed to mislead the enemy into a false sense of security while gathering strength, weapons, and resources for the next attack.
For years, Hamas has treated every hudna as a pit stop — time to rebuild, rearm, and prepare for the next round. Hundreds of Israeli civilians have paid for these “truces” with their lives.
And now, once again, Hamas politburo member Muhammad Nazzal is floating a “five-year hudna,” conveniently priced at $70 billion in foreign aid to “rebuild Gaza.” Translation: Send cash while we reload.
So unless Hamas is disarmed and its ideology rejected, any so-called “ceasefire” isn’t peace — it’s just an intermission before the next war. A pause plan, not a peace plan.
Long answer
In Islamic tradition, there is the concept of hudna (هدنة) — not “peace” in the Western sense, but a truce or armistice meaning a temporary pause in fighting. For Islamic fundamentalists, hudna carries a strategic meaning rooted in history: the Prophet Muhammad made a ten-year hudna with the Quraysh tribe of Mecca, only to rebuild his army and conquer the city two years later after accusing them of a minor breach.
In classical Islamic law, a hudna is permitted when one side is weaker and seeks time to recover — not as an act of reconciliation, but as a strategic pause that can later be ended if the balance of power shifts.
In the West, a ceasefire implies a step toward lasting peace; in Islamist doctrine, a hudna is just a break in hostilities. When Yasser Arafat invoked Muhammad’s hudna in 1994 to describe his Oslo commitments “on the road to Jerusalem,” it was a clear signal to his followers: once strong enough, the fight would resume — and it did in 2000 with the Second Intifada’s wave of terror against Israeli civilians.
Hamas has followed the same playbook. Each hudna becomes a chance to rebuild, rearm, and prepare for the next assault. The Washington Institute documented at least ten Hamas ceasefires before October 7, 2023 — each one ending with Hamas stronger, deadlier, and more entrenched. Hundreds of Israeli civilians paid the price for those “truces.”
Understanding hudna is crucial when evaluating the latest Gaza ceasefire proposals. Hamas politburo member Muhammad Nazzal openly calls for a five-year hudna to “rebuild Gaza,” backed by $70 billion in foreign aid. Hamas, Qatar, and Turkey all describe it using the Arabic term “هدنة” (hudna – truce), not “سلام” (peace) or “صلح” (reconciliation). The message is unmistakable: this isn’t peace — it’s a tactical pause to recover and reload. Until Hamas is disarmed and its ideology dismantled, any “ceasefire” is merely an intermission before the next war.
