The Board of Peace denies that there is any “financial agreement” with Hamas, after the Kan public broadcaster revealed that the body agreed to cover $400 million of Hamas’s debt to outside parties.
“The claims that there is a financial agreement between the Board of Peace and Hamas are false,” top Board of Peace representative to Gaza Nickolay Mladenov writes in Hebrew on X. “No such proposal was discussed, negotiated, or considered, and it will not be on the table in the future either.”
“Hamas will have no role in the governance of Gaza and will have no access to funds,” he continues.
“Board of Peace funds are not transferred through Hamas,” Mladenov declares. “Every contract undergoes review and approval, every project is verified before payment, and all accounts are fully open to audit by donor governments.”
“There are more than enough genuine challenges in this effort. There is no need to invent additional ones,” he adds.
A Board of Peace official stresses to The Times of Israel that clause 5 of the 15-point roadmap is not the same as a financial agreement.
“It allows legitimate outstanding obligations, such as unpaid public servants or suppliers who provided genuine services to the population, to be assessed on their merits. That should not be confused with paying Hamas or covering obligations linked to terrorism, corruption or financial mismanagement,” the official says.
In his post, Mladenov also pushes Israel to endorse the roadmap for Gaza disarmament, saying it is Jerusalem’s best option.
“Israel is not required to rely on trust or take irreversible steps before verified actions are taken on the ground,” says Mladenov. “The goal remains the complete dismantling of weapons and ensuring that Gaza can never again pose the kind of threat Israel experienced on October 7.”
“The alternatives are for Hamas to remain in power and rebuild its military capabilities, or for Israel to resume control over Gaza’s entire population, at an enormous human, military and economic cost,” he argues.
“The Board of Peace offers a third option: full disarmament, civilian governance, an international security presence under American command, and oversight and verification mechanisms,” says Mladenov.
The International Stabilization Force, he stresses, is meant to “support disarmament and the establishment of a civilian government in which Hamas has no role. That has been our position from the outset, and it has not changed.”
Mladenov also says that a mechanism for monitoring violations has begun its work.