Since the outbreak of the "Al-Aqsa Flood" battle, the clamor for crushing Hamas has escalated among Israeli voices. This call has been echoed by major Western powers demanding an end to Hamas' rule in the Gaza Strip and its removal from the Palestinian decision-making circle.
This has been accompanied by a global campaign demonizing Hamas and labeling it as a terrorist organization, seen as an obstacle to achieving peace and stability in the Middle East. This sentiment is shared not only by Western powers but also by some influential Arab and regional forces that have grown weary of Hamas, citing its detrimental impact on their foreign relations and security and developmental strategies. Private discussions between Arab leaders and Western counterparts, as well as public disclosures by figures such as Dennis Ross and Thomas Friedman, have not been concealed from the media.
A World Without "Enthusiasm" (Hamas)
Therefore, these parties view Hamas as the problem, with its head becoming a target, and eradicating Hamas as the gateway to stability in the region.
Let us calmly deal with the hypothesis of eliminating Hamas within an objective framework. Those who have poisoned the world and the media against Hamas should answer our simple questions.
Hamas was established as a movement in 1987, around forty years after the decision to partition Palestine, the 1948 war, and the establishment of the Israeli entity. What did the lovers of peace and stability do during those forty years to grant Palestinians their rights, end the Israeli occupation, and implement United Nations resolutions? Was Hamas the real obstacle and problem?
Thirty years after the Oslo Accords in 1993, when the PLO leadership hoped for an independent Palestinian state within five years – who thwarted the agreement's implementation? Who destroyed the path of settlement? Who wrecked the two-state solution? Who turned Oslo and the settlement process into a catastrophe for the Palestinian people? Is it not the Israeli side that doubled the number of settlers, seized lands, Judaized the holy sites, and turned the Palestinian Authority into a functional security entity serving the occupation?
More than two decades after the Arab (Saudi) initiative, is it not the Israeli occupation that ignored it, doomed it, and put it on the shelf, if not in the trash bin?
Had there been no "Hamas" for all this time, would the Israelis have given the Palestinians a fully sovereign state in the West Bank and the Strip? Or is the problem inherent in Zionist ideology and the Israeli decision-making mentality that rejects this?
For instance, in response to the assassination of Yahya Ayyash, Hamas conducted several operations from February 25 to March 3, 1996, shaking the Israeli entity. This prompted major Western powers, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and several Arab and global nations to hold an international conference named "Peacemakers Conference" on March 13, 1996, in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, to support the settlement process and fight "terrorism."
The Palestinian Authority, in collaboration with the Israeli occupation and the United States, using all means of repression, launched a vicious campaign against Hamas, attempting to eradicate all ties to the Islamic resistance movement.
Practically, the Authority spared no stone unturned, managing to dismantle most, if not all, resistance cells, and was significantly successful in dismantling Hamas' organizational infrastructure and strangling its popular base.
And then what? In the following four years, the situation stabilized for the Authority, which, along with its "nine" security agencies, met Israeli demands and achieved the "quality standards" targeted. However, the Israeli occupation did nothing but continue its Judaization and colonization programs, using the settlement process as a cover to penetrate the Arab and Islamic regions and normalize relations with them, culminating in the failure of the Camp David negotiations in July 2000.
The pressing question is: during that period, which was practically a "world without Hamas," why was the promised peaceful settlement not realized?
As a result, Yasser Arafat lost any hope of achieving the Palestinian state he had sought, and this frustration played a key role in pushing Arafat to support the Al-Aqsa Intifada that erupted in September 2000 and Fatah's popular and military participation in it.
The second consequence is that Hamas quickly recovered its vigor, led the armed resistance, and gained unprecedented popular support, as evidenced by its overwhelming victory in the 2006 Legislative Council elections.
Attempts to create a "world without Hamas" continued at the hands of the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority for many years in the West Bank, and Hamas (which still suffers) faced harsh treatment by the Authority (along with Israeli brutality and American expertise), its pursuit, closure of its institutions, and targeting of its organizational structure. What has been the result after 16 years?
The outcome is that Hamas remains the most popular faction in the West Bank or, at least, the main competitor to Fatah. Otherwise, why would the Fatah leadership avoid electoral commitments and Palestinian house reordering in the spring of 2021, and continue to do so? And even in the Gaza Strip, the grueling siege and waging of five destructive wars over 16 years have only strengthened and popularized Hamas further.
Therefore, the question posed to the Israeli occupation is: if the West Bank is under your direct and indirect occupation and you have failed over 36 years to eradicate Hamas, even with a Palestinian partner, and it is still at the height of its popularity; what do you expect on the assumption that you could reoccupy the Strip? Why insist on "testing the tested" and on "reinventing the wheel"?
Occupation's Will or the People's Will?
An obvious question arises: does a "world without Hamas" reflect the will of the occupation and its allies, or the will of the Palestinian people?
Thus, does the Israeli occupation and its allies have the right to custody over the Palestinian people? Do they have the right to impose their standards for the Palestinian people to choose their representatives and leaders? What level of impudence and arrogance it is for the enemy to decide the nature and specifications of the leadership of a people who are victims of occupation?
The second basic question: why does the Western world, Arab normalizers, and their allies seek to adapt the situation in Palestine according to the occupation's desires and standards, making life comfortable for "Israel," rather than striving according to hundreds of international resolutions and the basics of peoples' right to self-determination, to adapt the situation in favor of ending the occupation and exerting all pressures on it to force that?
Consequently, the continued existence of the Israeli occupation – as a "state above the law" that secures and guarantees its occupation and continued subjugation of another people – is the abnormal situation that must disappear.
Therefore, if the Palestinian people choose Hamas in a free expression of their will, it is correct to respect the will of the people instead of the occupier's will. Hamas ruled the Gaza Strip according to a Palestinian majority that elected it, not with the permission of "Israel" or America, nor with their approval, to stay if they are pleased or leave if they are angry; it's not their concern.
Realistic Indicators
Indicators show that after more than 75 days of the Israeli brutal and destructive aggression on the Gaza Strip, Hamas's popularity remains high and rising, with the Palestinian cradle rallying around it both inside and outside Palestine. The Israeli mad desire to reach a "world without Hamas" only strengthens Hamas and elevates its status Palestinianly, Arably, Islamically, and globally as a resistance and liberation movement; while the ugly face of the occupation is exposed more and more.
Recent polls, released by the Palestinian Center for Political and Survey Research on 12/13/2023, show a rise in Hamas's popularity, more rallying around the resistance line, and an overwhelming majority demanding the resignation of Abbas.
Moreover, perhaps if there were a referendum on the most popular factions or parties in the Arab and Islamic world, Hamas would win comfortably and attain a positioning no Palestinian faction, Arab or Islamic party, or leader could dream of. Perhaps "Abu Ubaidah," whose name and face are unknown, would receive far more votes than many leaders and presidents whose names echo in the media day and night.
Hamas and the International Community
Would the world be better off without Hamas to support the Palestinian cause in the international community?
In truth, an objective study of the world's interaction with the Palestinian cause – its leadership on the international agenda and the increase in voting support for it since Hamas's inception to now (1987-2023) – indicates that whenever there is resistance, an uprising atmosphere, confrontation with the occupation, and a rise in Hamas's role, this support percentage in the UN voting, official, and public interaction increases.
Whenever the settlement current dominates and imposes a state of "calm," international interest and support and UN voting percentages decline; this is exploited by the Israeli side for more colonization and Judaization, aiming to close the Palestinian file and imposing its conceptions that obliterate the Palestinian people's rights to their land and holy sites. Researchers like Dr. Walid Abdel Hai have written about this phenomenon.
Hamas and "Terrorism"
Several Western countries accuse Hamas of "terrorism" and of killing civilians, deeming it necessary to remove it from the purview of international legitimacy. Yet, for the Palestinian people, Arabs, and Muslims, Hamas is a moderate and open Islamic movement, a national liberation movement whose existence is linked to confronting Zionist terrorism and ending the occupation.
Attempting to crush Hamas and sideline it will not end the core idea of liberation, sacred rightly held by any people with dignity aiming to self-determine. Accusing Hamas of terrorism is merely a tool to prevent any legitimate resistance action against the occupation.
As for targeting civilians, perhaps there is no room here for discussion, but historically it suffices to mention that since its inception, Hamas has focused on military targets. After the Hebron Mosque massacre by a Zionist in 1994, Hamas offered the occupation to avoid killing civilians, but this was ignored, with the occupation continuing its massacres.
For the record, documented statistics indicate that the occupation has killed more than 11,000 Palestinians, the vast majority civilians, from 2000 until just before the "Al-Aqsa Flood" operation on October 7 last year. The whole world is now a witness to the Zionist massacres in the Gaza Strip. So, let's first talk about "Zionist terrorism."
Moderate Islamic civilizational thought is the most robust and broadest school in Palestine, the Arab world, and the Islamic world. Palestine, with its great religious significance and heritage, occupies a central place in the heart of every Arab and Muslim.
This school, even if Hamas is struck, is capable of regenerating a stronger and broader movement. Its advocates see it as linked to a just battle worthy of sacrifice and death, as well as to the status of Palestine and not necessarily to the existence of Hamas. It's an ideology entrenched in Palestinian society and the nation, and it is folly to ignore it and insist on going against historical movement after thirty years of British colonialism and 75 years of Zionist colonialism, utilizing mechanisms that have proven unsuccessful.
The clear outcome of this discussion is that those who speak of a world without Hamas are not only targeting Hamas but the resistance of the Palestinian people, its live and free forces. They want a world that creates a suitable environment for the continuation of occupation and the oppression of the Palestinian people. They want a Palestinian people without will, dancing to the occupier's tune, a people without claws or teeth, which will never be the case!
Instead, global efforts should be aimed at creating a world without colonization… a world without occupation… a world without a Zionist colonial replacement and expansionist aggression project… a world that respects the free will of peoples… focused on pressuring "Israel," not on fighters for their freedom, a world that stops shirking the inevitable outcome, sooner or later, of liberating Palestine and ending the occupation.
