Hamas and Israel

Oct 04, 2024 Peeping Tom

Peeping tom…

Kaieteur News – On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a series of coordinated attacks on Israeli civilians, resulting in the deaths of over a thousand people.

This brutal assault has been characterized as terrorism, and rightfully so. It was a deliberate targeting of non-combatants, intended to instill fear, provoke outrage, and further a political agenda.

Yet, while Hamas’s actions meet the definition of terrorism, they do not constitute state-sponsored terrorism. To understand this distinction is critical, especially in the current geopolitical climate, where accusations and labels are wielded as weapons.

Hamas is an organization that, through its actions, seeks to advance a specific political goal—the liberation of Palestinian territories and the eradication of Israeli presence therein. Its tactics reflect a broader strategy that has historically relied on violence to achieve objectives. The nature of their actions on that fateful day was designed to strike fear and compel response, characteristics inherent to terrorism.

However, what sets Hamas apart from state-sponsored terrorism is the absence of a state apparatus that supports its violent endeavors. Hamas operates as a non-state actor, relying on its own resources and ideology to conduct operations against Israel. While the group may receive financial and military support from other nations or entities, it does not act as an agent of a recognised sovereign state. Therefore, the actions of Hamas on October 7 were terrorism, but not state-sponsored terrorism.

In stark contrast, the actions of the Israeli government illustrate a troubling reality of state-sponsored terrorism. Israel’s policy towards its opponents, particularly Palestinians, can be characterized as a systematic campaign of extermination through military warfare. This includes airstrikes on civilian populations, the destruction of homes, and a strategy that seeks to eliminate opposition through fear and violence. Such policies are sanctioned and directed by the Israeli state, making them inherently different from the isolated acts of violence committed by groups like Hamas.

Israel’s policy of assassinating military commanders and individuals deemed enemies constitutes terrorist activities because it employs targeted killings as a method of statecraft. It is therefore state-sponsored terrorism as distinct from terrorism practiced by non-state actors.

The distinction lies not just in the actions themselves but in the intent and structure behind them. The Israeli government has employed military tactics that are systematically violent, designed not only to neutralize immediate threats but also to instill long-term fear and obedience among populations under its control. This is state-sponsored terrorism—a systematic use of violence, endorsed by the state, to achieve political ends.

What makes this even more alarming is the complicity of the United States in these actions. The U.S. has historically provided significant military aid to Israel, effectively condoning its policies that result in widespread violence against Palestinian civilians. In this context, one must consider the hypocrisy inherent in U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. has absurdly accused Cuba of sponsoring terrorism, despite Cuba’s actions being far less egregious than those of Israel. This double standard not only undermines the credibility of U.S. accusations but also highlights the politically motivated nature of the term “terrorism.”

When we label Hamas as a terrorist organization, we must do so with the understanding that it is not a reflection of a comprehensive understanding of the geopolitical landscape. Instead, it is essential to recognize that terrorism, in its broadest sense, encompasses both state-sponsored and non-state actions. The tragedy is that both forms of violence perpetuate a cycle of suffering for innocent civilians.

Moreover, framing the conflict as one-dimensional—Hamas as the terrorists and Israel as the innocent victim—oversimplifies a deeply complex situation. It ignores the historical context, the systemic oppression faced by Palestinians, and the continuous cycle of violence that has characterized this conflict for decades.

Hamas is fundamentally attempting to liberate Palestinian territories from over 70 years of Israeli occupation, which has systematically deprived Palestinians of their rights, land, and sovereignty. Since the establishment of Israel in 1948, Palestinians have faced widespread displacement, military control, and the erosion of their national identity. Hamas positions itself as a resistance movement advocating for the rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people, aiming to end the occupation and achieve self-determination. While its methods are controversial and often violent, they are rooted in a historical context of oppression, where the organization sees itself as fighting against an occupying force that continues to violate international laws and humanitarian norms.

To accurately assess the dynamics at play, one must consider the broader implications of state policies that contribute to the violence and despair faced by ordinary people on both sides of the conflict. And not be lulled into framing one side as villain and the other as victim.