How do you solve a problem like Hamas?
And so I turn my attentions to a slightly different question that perhaps isn’t being asked sufficiently as opinion on complex historical, political, religious and social questions descends into simple binary thinking. It is not enough to “stand” with one side or the other, amplifying prejudices and grievances. Instead, anyone who desires a lasting peace in the area (or any kind of peace at all) needs to be seeking solutions, however improbable that seems at the moment.
The question I have been asking is this: how do you solve a problem like Hamas?
The first thing I will say is that question isn’t intended to suggest Hamas is entirely, or even principally, responsible for the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian issue. After all, Hamas was only created in 1987 and there have been so many other influences on events. However, what cannot be denied is that Hamas are now central to those events and no solution will be possible without involving them in one way or another. There are of course three generalised approaches to Hamas – first, that of Israel, which aims to eradicate it; secondly, to support it as a band of freedom fighters struggling for the freedoms of Palestinians; thirdly, to bring Hamas into talks about ceasefires and, moving forward, plans for longer-term peace.
All of those approaches are flawed for various reasons, but at least the latter acknowledges that no peace is possible without Hamas being either eliminated (highly improbable) or convinced to put aside the aims as stated in the Hamas Covenant (equally unlikely).
So, how do you solve a problem like Hamas?
Firstly, it must be recognised that Hamas is a problem. Now, I’m not suggesting that Hamas is the only problem in Israel-Palestine, but I think we should all be able to acknowledge that the kinds of unspeakable atrocities that occurred on 7th October constitute crimes against humanity. If we can’t accept that, then perhaps we are part of the problem. Simchat Torah 2023 was arguably the worst day for nation of Israel since its formation and if we cannot feel some degree of empathy with Hamas's victims then we are tacitly supporting terrorist activity.
It must be acknowledged that Hamas’s very identity is part of the problem. Admittedly, Hamas is a problem that the State of Israel has helped to create (it was actually formed with Israeli encouragement to counter the PLO) but we need to recognise what Hamas is – and what it is not. Hamas – or, to give it its full title, Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiya (Islamic Resistance Movement) – is not a liberation organisation for Palestinians, but a jihadist movement. Its covenant, or founding charter, opposes the “secularism” of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO), sees anti-Israel resistance as the responsibility of every Muslim (“In [the] face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.”) and views the complete destruction of Israel as necessary before a Palestinian state can be created. Tellingly, Article 13 states the belief that “there is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad” and that negotiated settlements are simply impossible – so talk of two-state solutions and peace processes aren’t likely to get very far with Hamas.
Hamas have been nothing other than consistent with their stated philosophy over the last 35 years. The Hamas Covenant’s anti-Jewish nature is obvious; while not surprising, these are the words or religious fanatics, not an organisation focused on the humanitarian rights and living standards of Palestinians. Hamas is not merely a political organisation fighting a political battle.
It has been concerning to see many who understandably identify with the Palestinian cause either excuse or legitimise Hamas’s shameful actions. The irony that many who rightly criticise Israel’s government for its human rights abuses now offer support to an organisation that exists to create its own apartheid state is stunning. I am a believer in Palestinian freedom, but my idea of what that should look like is very different to Hamas’s.
Hamas is not officially recognised by Arab nations. While support for the Palestinian cause runs high, few (aside from Qatar) are happy to back Hamas. Jordan, Egypt and even Saudi Arabia have been content in recent weeks to reiterate criticisms of Israeli policies towards Palestinians but have stopped well short of offering anything resembling support to Hamas – perhaps due to domestic fears of the threats posed by Hamas-sympathetic opposition groups. Bahrain and the UAE have gone so far as to condemn Hamas’s attacks on civilians. It is worth noting that the Arab League recognises the PLO – not Hamas – as “the sole and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people”.
While tensions have escalated, talks aimed at normalising relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel have stalled (Hamas’s attacks may well have been aimed at disrupting these talks). The former – while understanding the need to demonstrate its pro-Palestine credentials – is clearly uneasy about openly supporting a terrorist organisation.
And that’s the point – Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Saudi Arabia understands this. Egypt and Jordan understand this, so does the PLO. No doubt many people living in Gaza and the West Bank (where Hamas has been actively undermining the Palestinian Authority and its ageing president, Mahmood Abbas) understand this too.
The first step to resolving the problem of Hamas is to understand its nature. Too many of us, especially in “the West”, want to reinvent them as freedom fighters for a cause we believe in, naturally sharing our aims and values. It would be difficult to see an organisation less committed to creating the kind of state so many Western pro-Palestinians want to see.
So, if we’ve got past point 1 and recognised that Hamas is a problem, what next? How do we go about actually solving that problem?
The way to deal with Hamas is NOT to respond as Israel has done. Israel has acted entirely predictably, but not in the interests of Palestinians or even Israeli security. It is understandable that Israel wants to ensure that Hamas will never again be able to mount the kind of attack it did almost four weeks ago, but how is it possible to neutralise such a threat?
As I pointed out in my previous piece, actions against innocent civilians that cause disproportionate human suffering will only strengthen Hamas and any “solution” achieved purely through the use of force is likely to be counter-productive: kill one terrorist and three more will rise up in their place. While ousted from power, the Taliban was not wiped out out by a much better-equipped military operation and is now back in power in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda has similarly far from disappeared. Extremist ideologies cannot simply be countered through the use of military force.
Of course, Israel is part of the problem too on multiple levels – but it at least has an opportunity here to also demonstrate its willingness to be part of the solution. Sadly, Benjamin Netanyahu is no Yitzhak Rabin. What Israel could have done in the aftermath of Hamas’s atrocities is to seek international co-operation and put some pressure on Arab nations to take responsibility for resolving the conflict. Saudi Arabia, for example, may be understandably keen to express its support for Palestine but economic pragmatism means it won’t want to keep a deal with Israel off the table for too long. A worsening of tensions is in no-one’s interests other than Hamas – and its fundamentalist allies in Arab states. The likes of Saudi Arabia would have the religious authority to counter the claims made my Hamas that its actions are sanctioned by Allah.
Countering shocking human rights abuses in Israel with the creation of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza is not acceptable. Just as I will call out Hamas as terrorists, so too am I willing to state that Israel is breaching international law in its blockade of Gaza. It is also totally counter-productive: even if Israel was successful in killing every member of Hamas, the human cost would be enormous. Would Palestinians thank their “liberators”? Israel has to develop a policy that will help it contribute to the peace, and that surely involves improving rights and conditions for Palestinians. The best way to neutralise support for Hamas isn’t through a brutal military response that harms civilians disproportionately, but by addressing grievances and injustices.
The US supports Israel’s right “to go after Hamas leadership”, but how is this realistically achievable through action in Gaza? This approach is flawed precisely because much of Hamas’s leadership is not actually in Gaza: Hamas is not a Gazan people’s army but a jihadist network. Ismail Haniyeh, chair of Hamas’s political bureau, is known to be in Qatar. Other leaders are in Turkey, protected by Recce Tayyip Erdogan who denies Hamas is a terrorist organisation. Violations of international law against the people of Gaza are only going to strengthen the position of Hamas’s leaders living safely abroad, not weaken them.
The Israeli government has played directly into Hamas’s hands. The mission to “eliminate Hamas” may have bought Netanyahu some political time but it will not achieve its stated aims. Just as the “war on terror” didn’t create a safer world and only helped to birth Islamic State (ISIS), the war on Hamas is doomed to failure. Israel has a right to defend itself, but any defence surely has to improve rather than reduce Israel’s security? Already it’s looking more like a war on Gaza than a war on Hamas, and that is because the Netanyahu government has no idea how to deal with the latter.
Hamas’s attacks on 7th October were so inhuman that they were clearly designed to force Israel into a response. A desire for revenge was understandable. But, in pursuing it, the danger is that Israel gives Hamas everything it wants. The death toll in Gaza is already helping them win the PR war, while establishing them – and not the PLO or Fatah (a social democratic Palestinian national movement) – as the "true" Palestinian resistance.
Which brings me to my third observation on how to defeat Hamas – stop funding them. It’s quite simple isn’t it? Well, no – not really. But the point is pretty straightforward to understand.
Hamas is well funded by Iran and Qatar. Quite how well-funded is difficult to establish, although the Iranian contribution is estimated to amount to “tens of millions” annually. Qatar appears to have made even larger donation on the supposed basis of providing humanitarian relief to Gaza. This funding actually passes through Israel.
Is that surprising? It shouldn’t be. Israel has for many years been an enabler of Hamas and Netanyahu has helped build up the organisation. Israel has done nothing to stop the flow of cash (and crypto) to Hamas. Just as Israel encouraged the development of Hamas to challenge the PLO in the late 1980s, in recent years Netanyahu has been keen to set Hamas (strong in Gaza) and Fatah (strong in the West Bank) against each other. This has ensured a divided Palestine, meaning there is no realistic prospect of either a Palestinian state or a return to peace talks. Hamas has been allowed to rule over Gaza unchallenged since it ousted the Palestinian Authority 16 years ago – why?
As Jonathan Freedland made clear in a Guardian piece last week, “none of this was a secret”. Netanyahu remarked at a Likud Party meeting in 2019: “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas … This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.” Israel has intentionally propped up Hamas for years.
If Israel’s strategy to divide Palestine makes some sense, it inevitably had potential consequences that Netanyahu should have foreseen. In strengthening Hamas, he has weakened not only other Palestinian groups but Israel. Put simply, Netanyahu’s policy has been a catastrophic failure with an unimaginable human cost.
Netanyahu is completely wrong – those who have the security interests of Israel at heart must oppose bolstering Hamas and transferring money to them. Most Arab states won’t do it. It’s the modern equivalent of paying danegeld, with sadly similar results.
So, my fourth point is this – if you want to solve the problem that is Hamas, the divide and conquer approach must cease. It has self-evidently failed and those behind this policy now have blood on their hands. It is time to do things differently.
My fifth suggestion is that there needs to be a change of government in Israel. Netanyahu has failed. “Mr Security” not only failed to keep Israel secure, his policies have led to exactly where we are now. He has to take responsibility and, ideally, resign. Failing that, he must be ousted. The current war with Hamas has given the Israeli Prime Minister some relief from significant ongoing protests, but the conflict is no reason for him to remain in office. On the contrary, it is a good reason to see him removed. Netanyahu has brought Israel to this point and has no answers to the problems created by his failings of leadership.
The cycle of violence has to be ended and Netanyahu isn’t going to do that. He’s also been drawn into playing this according to Hamas’s rules. As such, he cannot be part of the solution.
Finally, the Arab world needs to step up. Cautious words are useful, but they are no substitute for a plan of action. Supporters of Palestine can ill-afford for the Palestinian cause to be hijacked by Hamas. Rather than simply refuse to openly support Hamas, it’s time that more followed the lead of Bahrain and the UAE in calling out their terrorism. Once Hamas realises it is isolated – and only when that happens – can there be any scope for bringing them around the negotiating table. The Arab League in particular has a potentially significant role to play in not only urging calm but in playing by terms not set by Hamas.
Another way is possible, but it requires more than “standing” with one side or the other. If Palestinians and Israelis are to enjoy peace and security then both Hamas’s inflexible, intolerant jihadism and Israel’s divide and conquer outlook must be defeated.
Comments