Hamas is at a crossroads, grappling with intense internal and external pressures as the group navigates the tumultuous landscape of its military and political strategy. The organization has formidable grassroots clout in Gaza City and surrounding towns. Yet today it finds itself under mounting challenge after the killings of much of its earlier leadership and most recent operatives by Israeli aerial bombardments. Experts say that with the political balance of power in flux, Hamas will have to make decisions that are “between the bad and the worst.”
Since March, Israeli military operations have largely routed Hamas’s leadership into the ground—at least 40 commanders and major operatives have been killed. In fact, recent reports suggest that upwards of 90% of Hamas’s commanders have been knocked out, and Hamas has found itself in a dire situation. According to Israel, they have destroyed or intercepted 97% of all rockets fired by Hamas. In reality, Hamas retains overall control of 60% of its massive tunnel complex, with only 40% reportedly destroyed. Thousands of Hamas fighters have been killed — including almost all of its senior leadership — decimating Hamas’s tactical and operational capabilities.
Since the armed struggle is still a central tenet of Hamas’s identity, any talk of disarmament would prove provocative. Prominent Israel head of National Security Council Michael Milshtein, one of the key analysts on Middle Eastern affairs, said that they were all unanimously opposed to disarmament. Taking up armed struggle profoundly influences their character. As talks get underway, the delegation finds itself pressed by such powerful allies as Turkey and Qatar to offer concessions. This produces an institutional tension between their military goals and the necessity for political compromise.
Hamas’s political presence in Doha is seen as being more pragmatic than its military leadership in Gaza. As Lovatt, a longtime mover and observer of regional dynamics, wrote recently, “there is a contrasting trend towards insularity and isolationism within the movement.” The mood membership in Doha is more pragmatic, particularly compared to the military leadership in Gaza. This bifurcation further underlines the tumultuous internal landscape of Hamas as it seeks to marry its war goals with its political aims.
The organization is fighting a new RAND Corporation–proposed plan to require a host of onerous preconditions for a ceasefire. Hamas should release all Israeli hostages within 72 hours of the ceasefire. Further, this proposal looks for a staged redeployment of Israeli military troops to a buffer zone just outside the perimeter. It demands an immediate influx of humanitarian relief into Gaza. A source close to Hamas revealed that the plan includes a demand for the disarmament of the militant group.
Going forward, negotiations will only be fruitful if experts’ predictions of Hamas reactive conditional acceptance help bring about the desired outcome. “They will say ‘yes, but we need this and that’,” explained Mkhaimar Abusada, an analyst who closely monitors Palestinian politics. The complicated calculus of holding onto the armed struggle while facing growing international diplomatic pressure puts Hamas in a tough spot.
Looking at the strategic context, today is the moment for Israel to use the military gains it’s made over Hamas for all it is worth. As two foreign policy analysts recently wrote, this is the moment where Israel can make Hamas fold. Hugh Lovatt remarked, “That is understandable. The text lacks details. Further, any response from Hamas — even one that fulfills this condition — will be used against them. The real beneficiaries of this will be Israel, the Trump administration, and perhaps European nations. This further highlights the consequences that await Hamas should it be unable to reach a common ground between diverging pressures.
Michael Milshtein further emphasized the resiliency of Hamas despite its setbacks, stating, “Hamas have adjusted to the new conditions. They are active in areas where the [Israeli military] has declared Hamas is totally defeated, but you can’t totally erase Hamas. They have metamorphosed and they have survived.” This adaptability portrays that although Hamas is under existential and unprecedented pressure, it is very far from beatable or beaten in the broader space.