CREATION AND RISE OF HAMAS

Hey Guys,

I am super glad to welcome you back to this space to continue on this amazing journey of exploring events in the International system and basically to let you in on my many interests. Sit back, sip a cup of whatever you love (for me it is a cup of blazing hot chocolate) and enjoy the read.

In case you had missed the first chapter, premised on the genesis of the crisis between Israel and Hamas, don’t worry—you can always get up  to speed.This chapter promises to explore the creation and rise of Hamas.

ORIGIN

Hamas, which stands for Ḥarakat al-Muqāwamah al-Islāmiyyah (Islamic Resistance Movement), was founded in 1987 during the First Intifada, a Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation.

FACTORS LEADING TO HAMAS’ FORMATION

There are several factors that led to the formation of Hamas:

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict’s broader historical context is necessary to understand Hamas’s formation. After the 1967 Six-Day War, Israel occupied the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, leading to widespread discontent among Palestinians.

INFLUENCE OF THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

Hamas emerged from the Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization that had been active in the Gaza Strip since the 1950s. The Brotherhood’s network of mosques, charities, and social organizations provided a strong foundation for Hamas.

The Brotherhood’s ideology, which combined Islamic principles with political activism, influenced Hamas’s formation.

DISCONTENT WITH THE FATAH & PLO

Initially, Hamas viewed Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the Ḥarakat al-Taḥrīr al-Waṭanī al-Filasṭīnī (Palestinian National Liberation Movement) known as Fatah as too lenient and ineffective in resisting Israeli occupation.

Fatah, led by Yasser Arafat, had been the dominant political force in Palestinian politics since the 1960s.

Hamas believed that Fatah’s willingness to engage in peace talks and the recognition of the statehood of Israel undermined the Palestinian cause and failed to achieve meaningful concessions from Israel. They opted for a more militant and religiously driven agenda as a replacement.

This ideological and political rivalry led to violent clashes and eventual split between the two factions.

FIRST INTIFADA

The First Intifada, a Palestinian uprising against Israeli occupation that began in December 1987, was a crucial catalyst for Hamas’ formation. The uprising was characterized by widespread protests, strikes, and civil disobedience. Hamas capitalized on the growing discontent and mobilized support for its cause, positioning itself as the vanguard of the resistance.

HAMAS RISE TO POWER & GAZA TAKEOVER

The year was 2006, and it was time for the Palestinian legislative elections. Hamas indicated interest, campaigned on a platform of armed resistance against Israeli occupation, and won a majority of seats in the Palestinian Parliament, defeating the ruling Fatah party.

Battle of Gaza (2007)

The Battle of Gaza, also known as the Gaza Civil War, a brief but intense conflict between Fatah and Hamas that took place from June 10 to June 15, 2007, was the culmination of conflicts at different times.

The fighting involved intense street battles, sniper fire, rocket-propelled grenades, and mortar attacks.

The battle resulted in Hamas taking control of the Gaza Strip, while Fatah officials were either taken as prisoners, executed, or expelled. 

The Palestinian Centre for Human Rights reported that at least 161 people were killed and more than 700 were wounded during the fighting.

This pivotal moment marked the beginning of its transformation into a powerful and influential force.

With swift and decisive action, Hamas took charge of Gaza’s infrastructure, encompassing everything from food banks and schools to hospitals. By ensuring the provision of essential services, the organization gained widespread support and legitimacy among Palestinians, solidifying its role as the leader of Gaza.

Bolstering its newfound authority, Hamas relied on the formidable strength of its armed wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades. This military might enable Hamas to maintain order, enforce its rule, and respond effectively to any threats, further cementing its grip on the region.

Fatah left without a choice and retreated to the West Bank.

Aftermath

Following the takeover, Hamas established a one-party Islamist statelet in Gaza, with Ismail Haniyeh serving as the leader until February 2017. 

Political Isolation

Hamas faced significant political isolation. The international community, including the United Nations and most Western countries, refused to recognize Hamas as the legitimate government of Gaza. Instead, they continued to support the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the West Bank as the official representative of the Palestinian people.

Humanitarian Crisis

The blockade and ongoing conflict resulted in a severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The United Nations and other international organizations reported widespread poverty, unemployment, and malnutrition. The overwhelming demand on the healthcare system and limited access to clean water and sanitation were evident.

Reconstruction Efforts

The extensive damage caused by the conflict required significant reconstruction efforts. International aid organizations and NGOs worked to rebuild homes, schools, hospitals, and infrastructure. However, the ongoing blockade and restrictions on the import of building materials hampered these efforts.

Internal Governance

Hamas established a one-party rule in Gaza, the organization focused on consolidating its power and maintaining control over the territory. The organization strengthened its internal security forces and suppressed dissent.

REDUCING HAMAS’ POWER IN GAZA

Various countries have played significant roles in attempting to reduce the influence of this militant group, each employing unique strategies and resources.

Israel, at the forefront of this effort, conducted multiple military operations aimed at dismantling Hamas’s infrastructure. Through airstrikes, ground invasions, and blockades, Israel sought to weaken Hamas’ control and prevent further attacks. These actions, however, also led to significant casualties and widespread destruction, fueling a cycle of violence and retaliation.

The United States, recognizing Hamas as a terrorist organization, imposed sanctions to curb its activities. Providing military aid to Israel, the U.S. supported efforts to counter Hamas while also engaging in diplomatic measures to promote peace and stability in the region.

Egypt, sharing a border with Gaza, played a dual role. As a mediator, Egypt often brokered ceasefires between Hamas and Israel, seeking to de-escalate conflicts. At the same time, Egypt cooperated with Israel in maintaining the blockade on Gaza and took measures to destroy smuggling tunnels that supplied Hamas with weapons and essential goods. This control over the Rafah border crossing allowed Egypt to regulate the movement of people and resources, significantly impacting the situation in Gaza.

The European Union (EU), while imposing sanctions on Hamas, also provided humanitarian aid to the beleaguered population of Gaza. Balancing punitive measures with humanitarian concerns, the EU aimed to support civilians while isolating the militant group.

Saudi Arabia, a key player in regional politics, supported efforts to counter Hamas’ influence and participated in reconstruction initiatives in Gaza. By contributing funds and resources, Saudi Arabia sought to improve living conditions in Gaza and mitigate the impact of the conflict.

Qatar, on the other hand, provided financial aid to Gaza and supported Hamas through various channels. Despite its support, Qatar also engaged in mediation efforts, striving to foster dialogue and promote a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

These nations, each with their motivations and strategies, contributed to the ongoing efforts to reduce Hamas’ power in Gaza. Their actions, ranging from military interventions to diplomatic negotiations, shaped this deeply entrenched conflict’s complex and ever-evolving landscape.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS/ONGOING CONFLICT

In October 2023, a fresh round of conflict, one of the most intense and destructive in recent years, erupted between Hamas and Israel, resulting in significant casualties and destruction in Gaza.

The ceasefire that followed has been fragile, with ongoing tensions and sporadic violence. 

Conflict Overview

The conflict began on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a deadly attack on Israel, prompting the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to engage in aerial campaigns and ground operations within the Gaza Strip. The violence has caused widespread destruction across Gaza, where approximately 2.3 million Palestinians reside.

Ceasefire Details

A ceasefire agreement was finalized on January 15, 2025, after 15 months of intense fighting. The United States, Egypt, and Qatar mediated the ceasefire. The agreement includes:

• Release of 33 Israeli hostages held by Hamas.
• Release of approximately 2,000 Palestinian prisoners by Israel.
• Withdrawal of Israeli forces from populated areas in Gaza.
• Humanitarian assistance to be made widely available in Gaza.

Casualties

As of February 3, 2025, the casualty figures are as follows:

• In Gaza, the conflict killed at least 61,709 people, among them 17,492 children. More than 111,588 people were injured. Over 14,222 people are still missing and presumed dead.
• Israel: 1,139 people killed and 8,730 people injured.

Impact on Gaza

The conflict has caused extensive damage to Gaza’s infrastructure. According to a United Nations report, the conflict has inflicted $18.5 billion worth of damage on Gaza’s infrastructure.

The report also projected that restoring Gaza’s GDP to its 2022 level would take approximately 350 years.

POTENTIAL CHANGE OF GAZA STRIP OWNERSHIP

Hamas’s grip on the Gaza Strip is facing huge opposition from the United States if the statements of President Donald Trump are anything to go by.

On Tuesday, February 5, 2025, while hosting Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, Trump announced a bold plan to take over the Gaza Strip. He revealed his vision for the redevelopment of Gaza, suggesting that the U.S. would take a “long-term ownership position” over the territory.

“The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it, too. We’ll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site,” the U.S. Supremo was quoted as saying.

“This was not a decision made lightly. Everybody I’ve spoken to loves the idea of the United States owning that piece of land, developing and creating thousands of jobs with something that will be magnificent in a magnificent area that nobody would know,” he added.

Opposition against the Plan

However, the proposal has sparked significant controversy and opposition from various international actors, including Hamas, which condemned the plan as a “recipe for creating chaos and tension in the region.”

As expected, Hamas did not mince words, calling the proposal “racist” and criticizing the United States for its perceived bias toward Israel at the expense of Palestinian rights. The plan, they argued, would only exacerbate existing tensions and further destabilize the region.

Hamas further called for an urgent Arab-Islamic summit to address the issue and reaffirm support for the Palestinian cause. They urged the international community to reject the proposal and stand in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Also, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) have firmly opposed any proposals to displace Palestinians from Gaza, stressing that such actions would violate international law. Abbas has asserted that achieving peace and stability in the region is contingent upon the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Arabian Countries like Egypt and Jordan have also expressed concerns about the plan, citing potential regional instability and the impracticality of relocating millions of Palestinians.

Numerous international leaders and human rights organizations have voiced their criticism of the proposal, emphasizing its potential to breach international law and intensify regional tensions. The response from the international community has been prompt and predominantly negative, with many condemning the plan as a grave violation of international law.

Support for the Plan

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed support for Trump’s proposal, although he did not explicitly endorse the idea of US control over Gaza.

“I think it’s worth paying attention to this idea. We’re talking about it. He’s exploring it with his people, with his staff. I think it’s something that could change history, and it’s worthwhile really pursuing this avenue.” – Netanyahu commented on Trump’s Gaza plan during a joint press conference, highlighting its potential to change history.

Netanyahu, in a separate interview with Fox News, emphasized the need to rebuild Gaza and suggested that Palestinians who wish to leave the territory should be allowed to do so.

“What’s wrong with the idea of allowing Gazans to leave? It should be pursued and done,” he stated.

Some Republican politicians praised Trump for his proposal, although they acknowledged that they were short on details.

A Senator, Josh Hawley (R-Mo.): Hawley expressed skepticism about the plan, stating that he did not think it was the best use of U.S. resources. However, he did not completely rule out the possibility of supporting it under certain conditions.

A colleague of Hawley, Senator John Fetterman (R-Pa.): Fetterman called the idea “provocative” but acknowledged that it was part of the conversation. He criticized the Palestinian leadership for failing to provide security and economic development.

I promise to be back in your hands and face again next week to help you understand the history of Ceasefires in the crisis and make sense of this current ceasefire agreement. Cheers, my friend.
See y’all soon.