Militant groups like Hamas were actually a response to occupation. Contrary to popular belief, they are not the natural enemies of Israel, it is in fact, quite the opposite.
Militant groups like Hamas were actually a response to occupation. Contrary to popular belief, they are not the natural enemies of Israel, it is in fact, quite the opposite.
This article represents the views and opinions of the author alone, and not necessarily of TMV as a whole.
“Do you support Hamas?”
This is a tricky question to answer as has become evident from countless Piers Morgan interviews in which Pro-Palestine advocates have been put on the spot. Their answer determines their credibility. It will either make them or break them.
As a South African, I know that if apartheid still existed today, that question would too be posed to journalists, scholars and advocates alike, “Do you support the ANC?”
The question itself is infuriating enough, but what is even more infuriating is when the advocate ultimately answers, “No, I do not support them, they need to be eradicated.” Disappointingly, they’re often Muslim.
It’s understandable, they may want to preserve their careers or images, these are valid reasons and may unfortunately be necessary in the West to preserve one’s safety, whether or not you actually agree with the statement. However, some advocates go as far as towing the line by referring to Hamas and other liberation groups within Palestine as terrorists.
This is not the correct way to go about answering this reductive question. To fully understand it, we must go deeper, we must probe Hamas’s very existence, the law, and an Islamic perspective. The answer you find here may surprise you.
Hamas in Context
As simply as possible, Hamas stands for Islamic Resistance Movement. It is a political and military organisation founded in 1987 at the start of the First Intifada. [1]
It sprung from the declining popularity of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) with the belief that armed struggle was the only way to achieve the liberation of Palestine and that other liberation groups were giving in to Zionist demands. Its position as of 2017 is simple, it rejects Israeli Statehood and accepts 1967 borders for Palestinian Statehood with Jerusalem as its capital and the right of return for Palestinian refugees. [2]
It is no secret to those willing to learn and understand that Hamas’s ideology is not rooted in anti-semitism but in anti-Zionism. Zionism is a political ideology coined in 1885 by Theodore Herzl, backed by white supremacist imperialism to establish a Jewish nation state, believing Palestine to be God-given for Jews.
Judaism, however, is a centuries-old Abrahamic faith, it is a religion and one should take care not to conflate the two. After the brutal suffering of the Jews during World War II, they were welcomed into an existing Palestine as refugees, however, the anti-Semitism they faced in Europe, bolstered the radical ideology of Zionism.
Zionism – not Judaism – is what disenfranchised Palestinians and stripped them of their ancestral homes. Thus, it is not Judaism, but Zionism that Hamas intends to eradicate for it is this ideology that resulted in the occupation and ethnic cleansing of Palestine.
The mainstream media would have you believe that Hamas is the enemy of Israel however, Hamas, as seen above, only came into existence in 1987 whereas the state of Israel was formed in 1948. Other popular Palestinian organisations came into existence after the first Nakba in 1948. It was in the years that followed, that displaced Palestinians would begin to take up arms in resistance to the Israeli occupation.
This is precisely what one should understand – that these militant groups like Hamas were actually a response to occupation. Contrary to popular belief, they are not the natural enemies of Israel, it is in fact, quite the opposite. Prior to Zionist plans to occupy Palestine, Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze and many others lived in peace in Palestine, it was not until the Zionist construct that the seeds of discord were sewn.
A lesson from a success story, whose liberation was achieved through similar tactics to Hamas, South Africa. The indigenous population was subject to segregation and apartheid, whose proponents believed that God had given them the land and that they could impose whatever laws were necessary to control non-whites and treat them as sub-human.
Non-white South Africans were subject to separate amenities, separate schools, forbidden inter-marriages, Bantustans, and more. And in resistance to that, the ANC formed its militant wing, uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) in 1961. It was a response to the then formal and legalised apartheid regime. In Nelson Mandela’s “I Am Prepared to Die” speech, he stated that our freedom fighters,
“…came to the conclusion that as violence in this country was inevitable, it would be unrealistic and wrong for African leaders to continue preaching peace and non-violence at a time when the government met our peaceful demands with force. This conclusion was not easily arrived at. It was only when all else had failed, when all channels of peaceful protest had been barred to us, that the decision was made to embark on violent forms of political struggle, and to form uMkhonto weSizwe. We did so not because we desired such a course, but solely because the government had left us with no other choice.”
It was not just the ANC but many other liberation organisations that were then designated as terrorists, Nelson Mandela himself being one of them well after he served as the first democratic president of South Africa. [3]
One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. This is not dissimilar from the armed struggle taken up by Hamas. In a different context, Hamas is an Islamic organization and thus, their purposes must be analysed from an Islamic perspective.
The Islamic Perspective
Islam and the Quran do not look at acceptance of defeat as an Islamic value, it acknowledges that as humans it is natural to resist occupation and tyranny. As a Muslim, it is in this context that one must consider the answer to the question, “Do you support Hamas?”
The oppressors say Islam is a violent religion only because it does not encourage one to be complacent with the oppression they seek to enforce. They expect that of the oppressed, that they will sit by and accept the atrocities committed against them or be labelled the villain for standing up against it.
In reality, violence is not an inherent trait of Islam, it is a last resort when no other avenues of peace exist. It is a right granted to us by Allah where necessary. War was a reality in the time of the Prophet Mohammed (SAW) and the Quran does not mince words.
“Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah has power to give them victory.” For over 13 years, Muslims were forced to be patient as the Meccan pagans committed increasingly oppressive ill treatment against them, their last resort was to take up arms as the Almighty revealed this ayah (verse) to the Prophet Muhammad (SAW), permitting them to act in self defence.
There are conditions of course as revealed in the next ayah, “[They are] those who have been expelled from their homes for no reason other than proclaiming: “Our Lord is Allah.” Had Allah not repelled ˹the aggression of˺ some people by means of others, destruction would have surely claimed monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which Allah’s Name is often mentioned. Allah will certainly help those who stand up for Him. Allah is truly All-Powerful, Almighty.” (Quran 22:39-40).
This effectively applies to those who have been expelled from their homes, subject to religious persecution and oppression. The ayah clearly extends protection not only to Muslims, but other people of the Book. This is Jihâd.
Jihad has become somewhat of a dirty word as a result of the mainstream narrative but it simply means “struggle”. In the Islamic context, part of what it encompasses is a struggle against the enemies of Islam. Islamic principles like justice, equality, human dignity and life have also become universally recognised values and the enemies of these values are also the enemies of Islam.
It is no secret that Israel is built on racism, colonialism, and many other forms of bigotry, their foundational beliefs have resulted in the deaths and mistreatment of Muslims, Christians and even Jews of colour. Israel claims its right to exist on ethno-religious supremacy, this is not Judaism, but Zionism, an affront to the morals and values of all Abrahamic faiths.
“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a White has no superiority over a Black nor a Black has any superiority over a White except by piety and good action.” [4]
It should follow that where an entity like Israel presents an affront to humanity and Islamic values through occupation, genocide and crimes against humanity, the oppressed are encouraged to take up arms against them.
Israel persecutes Palestinians for their ethnicity as well as their faith. [5] Palestine is home to the third holiest site in Islam, Masjid Al-Aqsa and the area surrounding it is sacred, it is the birthplace of Isa (AS), it is a sacred land and thus, the duty to protect it in line with these principles are of even greater importance. So, Hamas is Islamically justified in its existence.
One must be careful to describe this as a holy war, it is not. While Hamas’s motivations are rooted in faith, those of Israel are in name only. While they claim Palestine as a safe haven for Jewish people, it is hardly in line with Jewish religious values to desecrate, destroy and butcher. This mission is not a holy one, in fact many Israelis are paradoxically atheists. [6]
It is a settler-colonial and racist mission, bent on ethnically cleansing the indigenous population and creating their own state as the South African apartheid regime had done before.
Hamas’s declared intentions have only ever been to rid Palestine of Zionism and to achieve a ceasefire. They have not committed themselves to the genocide of Jews, as Israelis have committed themselves to the genocide of Palestinians. Hamas has only called for their hostilities perpetrated against them to cease and that the occupation desist. Theirs is a mission of self-determination in line with the Quran as well as International law.
While one may not agree with armed struggle, as a Muslim especially it must be understood that, “Jihâd is ordained for you though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allâh knows but you do not know.” (Quran 2:216)
The International Law
International law is an intricate web of laws, treaties, rules and regulations put in place and observed by the international community and by proclaimed keepers of law, order and peace like the United Nations.
The law and its enforcers have come under increasing scrutiny over the past year for their lack of efficacy and expediency. Nevertheless, it is useful to analyse the prospect of Hamas through this lens.
International humanitarian law is a field within international law specifically dealing with the law of armed conflict. It deals with the duties of warring parties to balance the need to resort to war with the principle of humanity, protecting civilians and limiting the negative consequences of war.
The Geneva Conventions are applicable in this field and have been ratified by both Israel and Palestine. The only party seeming to disregard its duties under this treaty is Israel.
Article 2 of this treaty states that the Geneva Conventions apply to cases of declared war or armed conflict and to all cases of total or partial occupation. It is a fact that Palestine is a recognised state with a right to self-determination and sovereignty. [7] It is also a fact that Israel is conducting an unlawful occupation of Palestine. [8]
It thus follows that a state of armed conflict exists between them. Additional Protocol 1 also recognises certain types of national liberation movements as parties to an armed conflict which Hamas clearly is.
Additional Protocol 1 states that “armed conflicts in which peoples are fighting against colonial domination and alien occupation and against racist regimes in the exercise of their right of self-determination, as enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations” are also applicable. [9]
Furthermore, UNGA Resolution 37/43 reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.
It must be remembered that this Resolution was passed in 1982, a time at which South Africa’s armed struggle was reaching new heights. This resolution had the effect of legitimising our struggle for freedom, so why is there a double standard? Why is Nelson Mandela remembered as the hero he was, but Yahya Sinwar as a terrorist?
The very concept of apartheid originated in South Africa and has become a crime against humanity yet when it continues to lay siege to Palestine, [10] it goes unpunished?
It is clear that international law not only recognises a right to resist but encourages and legitimises it, even through armed struggle which is the philosophy adopted by Hamas. By law, Hamas has every right to form, take up arms against their oppressor and resist.
So, Do You Support Hamas?
As a South African, a member of the Born Free Generation, I am inclined to reframe this and ask whether I agree with the ANC? The answer must be balanced. Do I agree with the tactics they employed during apartheid, not necessarily.
Things like the 1986 car bomb, various bombings of state entities, the 1970’s sabotage campaign and even the landmine campaign in the late 1980’s were destructive, often killed civilians in the process and I would not agree with the tactics however, the purpose is what must not be lost here.
The purpose of the ANC was not illegitimate. It is only natural that one can disagree with the tactics or policies of groups like the ANC and Hamas, but we cannot throw the baby out with the bathwater.
The concerns raised regarding human rights violations and Geneva Conventions regarding the tactics of the ANC were not left unchecked. After apartheid ended, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was established which held the ANC accountable for what it considered human rights violations. [11] International humanitarian law should have been upheld by the ANC however what must be noted is that this came after.
It came after the occupation and after the fight, it came after the armed struggle because one can never know what was necessary when it is still necessary, one can never be the judge of proportionality where there is no proportion in the fight.
Similarly to you, Piers Morgan, or you reader, we were not there during apartheid and we are not there in Gaza. We are privileged enough to make these judgements but what Palestinians engaged in armed struggle are doing is surviving by whatever means necessary. Judgement and accountability can only be imposed after the legitimate purpose has been achieved.
It is not for us to fault an occupied people for doing what they deem is necessary and proportionate for their survival and resistance. We could never imagine what they would have needed to do and like the ANC, violence is not something one wishes to inflict easily.
Do not shy away from this question, certainly do not lump Hamas in with “terrorists” when the real terrorists are Israel and its enablers. It is a matter of perspective.
What you cannot deny is the right to resist and in trying to uphold that both legally and Islamically, Hamas and other liberation parties may do things that seem ugly or morally questionable to you, but you cannot speak to their motivations. It is we who have running water, electricity, a roof over our heads and being as far removed as we are from the violence that we can even think to question the ethics and morality of a liberation movement like Hamas.
What is undeniable is that they are an oppressed people in the legal and Islamic senses, and they have every right to resist.
The right questions to ask are, “Do you support genocide?”; “Do you support ethnic cleansing?”; “If your children and home were forcefully taken from you by someone who told you that they are ethnically and religiously superior to you, what would you do? Would you accept defeat or fight?”
It is strange that people can resonate with the Rebellion, believe they would resist the Capitol and challenge the Empire, but when it comes to this very real issue, they are nothing more than what they claim to stand against.
References
[1] The Hundred Years’ War on Palestine: A History of Settler Colonial Conquest and Resistance Khalidi, Rashid I p 103-104
[2] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/5/2/hamas-accepts-palestinian-state-with-1967-borders
[3] https://time.com/5338569/nelson-mandela-terror-list/
[4] The Last Sermon of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) Musnad Aḥmad: no. 22978.
[5] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGO_24WT3i0&ab_channel=IslamChannel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HNd-FPBNeig&ab_channel=TheRealNewsNetwork
[6] https://www.maariv.co.il/journalists/Article-727017
[7] UN General Assembly Resolution 3236
[8] UNGA Report A/77/328
[9] ICRC
[10] Rome Statute
[11] Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act 34 of 1995
