The reported agreement by Hamas to a “complete disarmament” has renewed speculation about what a future beyond war might look like for Gaza. It has also left many unanswered questions.

Under the roadmap negotiated through US President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups would surrender their weapons in stages.

Israel would withdraw its forces from Gaza, and governance would gradually transfer to a Palestinian transitional administration supported by international monitors and an “international stabilisation force”.

But while Hamas has reportedly accepted the roadmap, implementation remains conditional on Israeli withdrawal. For its part, Israel has expressed “serious security concerns” about Hamas’ true intentions and said it will not withdraw until Hamas disarms.

For now, Gaza remains engulfed in conflict. Military operations continue, civilians are suffering, and the political obstacles to any agreement remain considerable.

But the prospect of disarmament raises a broader question: if the guns eventually fall silent, what happens to the allegations of war crimes under international law, and how can peace be built between communities carrying profound trauma?

International law in limbo

History suggests accountability will have to be central to any lasting agreement. In the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and Northern Ireland, this has been a long, difficult process.

Israelis continue to live with the effects of 2023’s October 7 attacks. Gazans, meanwhile, have endured........

© The Conversation