Yahya Sinwar, the newly appointed Hamas leader, has a lengthy history with the movement that dates back to its inception in 1987. His lineage can be traced back to the Ashqelon town where his family dwelt before the inception of Israel in 1948, a tragic event Palestinians often refer to as the Nakba. They relocated to the Gaza Strip during the conflict and Sinwar was born in a Khan Younis refugee camp in 1962.
At the Islamic University of Gaza, Sinwar pursued Arabic studies and during that period, he affiliated himself with the Muslim Brotherhood’s student wing. Over the 1980s, Sinwar developed a close relationship with Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founding leader of Hamas, becoming an early participant in the movement. Yassin assigned him the role of overseeing an internal security unit known as Al Majd which was tasked with investigating any suspicions of Palestinians’ collaboration with Israel.
Sinwar was taken into custody by Israeli officials on three separate occasions and was handed four life sentences in 1989 for his part in the kidnapping and murder of two Israeli soldiers and four Palestinians who he believed were allied with Israel. Throughout his 22-year imprisonment, he acquired Hebrew language skills and studied Israeli society and culture. In a 2011 prisoner exchange deal in which more than 1,000 Palestinians were swapped for a solitary Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, he was set free.
Sinwar is speculated to be the mastermind behind the severe attacks on Israel on October 7th that signaled the inception of the harshest period of the ongoing conflict. Last December, Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, announced that the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) had besieged Sinwar’s Khan Younis residence. However, it was believed that Sinwar had taken refuge deep within the extensive subterranean tunnel system beneath Gaza.
Israel has assassinated several prominent figures of Hamas, including its founder, Yassin, who established the movement during the first Palestinian uprising in 1987. Yassin was killed by an Israeli strike in March 2004. He was succeeded by his deputy, Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, another co-founder of Hamas, who was also killed less than a month into his leadership in an Israeli missile attack. Subsequent to Al-Rantisi, Khaled Meshaal led the movement from 2004 to 2017. Even though Meshaal grew up in the West Bank, most of his life was spent outside of the Palestinian territories under occupation. However, he became a prominent figure of Hamas, participating in diplomatic relations and negotiations on behalf of the movement. In 2017, Ismail Haniyeh took over the leadership after Meshaal, but was assassinated on July 31st, leading to Sinwar taking the helm of the movement.
Hamas’ origins can be traced back to several transformative events in the Palestinian political arena in the late 1980s. Most notably, there was a change in the ideological beliefs of some members of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood, who began to lean towards a more radical stance following the Israeli invasion of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem after the Six-Day War with neighbouring Arab countries in 1967.
The Muslim Brotherhood has been functional in Palestine since the 1940s, prior to the creation of Israel in 1948. The group aimed to shape Palestinian society in accordance with its interpretation of Islamic principles, prioritising this over opposition to Israeli invasion. Over time, a subgroup within the Brotherhood desired a more aggressive approach to resistance, rejecting the Brotherhood’s passive stance. They viewed their brand of Islamism as embodying both nationalist and religious goals.
In contrast to the Muslim Brotherhood who stressed social Islamisation as a foundation to opposing Israel, the precursors to Hamas set direct opposition to the occupation as their primary concern. They held that Palestinian land had been given to all Muslim people, thereby asserting the importance of Islamism in the fight for Palestinian freedom. This mindset gained significant momentum from the first intifada in 1987 – a time marked by community rebellion against occupation and mass public mobilisation. The culmination of this ideological shift led to the founding of the Islamic Resistance Movement, better known as Hamas, in December 1987.
The formation of Hamas was also deeply connected to the transformation of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO). Initially, they advocated armed opposition to the Israeli occupation but eventually became collaborators in the peace process initiated in the late 1980s. Pressured by the international sphere and acknowledging the ineffectiveness of armed struggle to achieve its objectives, PLO acknowledged the Israeli state in 1988, thereby consenting to forfeit 78% of historic Palestine and agreeing to base any future Palestinian state on the remaining land.
This formed the groundwork for the following peace procedure, however, it was entirely rejected by Hamas. Throughout the forthcoming negotiations, Palestinian concerns, such as statehood aspirations, rights of Palestinian refugees to go back to their homes, and a halt to Israeli settlement construction in the occupied territories were barely acknowledged. For numerous Palestinians, the creation of the Palestinian Authority under PLO’s management merely served to maintain the status quo in the occupied territories, benefiting Israel in the process.
Yet, it wasn’t wholly the changing internal Palestinian politics that instigated the rise of Hamas. During that period, Israel viewed an Islamic movement as less challenging than secular opposition to its role in the occupied territories. Brigadier General Yitzhak Segev revealed in 1981 that he had financially aided the Muslim Brotherhood as military governor of Gaza. This was done under the premise that Israel deemed “fundamentalists” less formidable than communist or nationalist Palestinian movements. Similarly, Avner Cohen, a past Israeli religious affairs official, confessed to the Wall Street Journal in 2009 that “Hamas, unfortunately, is Israel’s creation”.
In an unexpected turn of events, Hamas, despite its open opposition to the peace accord, agreed to partake in the 2006 Palestinian Legislative Council elections. The move was seen by many as an implicit acceptance to function within the frameworks established by the peace negotiations. The victory by Hamas caught many observers off guard, as it won a majority of 77 from the 122 available seats. In terms of the popular vote, the win over Fatah, in second place, was a slender one at 44.45% in comparison to Fatah’s 41.43%.
Following longstanding calls for democratic elections by the international community, the repercussions faced by Palestine after the election results, were less than cordial. In a matter of weeks, financial aid to the Palestinian Authority government was frozen by numerous countries including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Norway and the European Commission. The United States also fortified the Presidential Guard, loyal to Fatah’s leader Mahmoud Abbas, with military aid while Israel allowed the guard to amass a stronger arsenal. A failed coup move to depose Hamas from the Gaza Strip in June 2007, which was supported by the United States, resulted in Hamas assuming sole control over the territory following an intense conflict. The governance of West Bank and Gaza Strip has been divided between Fatah and Hamas ever since.
In 1988, a full three decades prior to these developments, Hamas had published a notorious charter seeking the abolition of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic society in Palestine. Approximately 30 years later in 2017, under the guidance of Meshaal, an amended version was introduced which did away with explicit calls for the extermination of Jews though the refusal to recognise Israel persisted.
Despite initial insinuations in the revised charter that Hamas may recognise a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967, a view held by Israel and the global community which inadvertently approves Israel’s statehood, after Haniyeh’s assassination, many anticipated that Meshaal, widely regarded as more moderate, would restore Hamas leadership. In contrast, Sinwar has gained a reputation for strictness in his interactions with Israel, holding a potent veto power over ceasefire discussions in progress, readily allowing the dispute to keep going if it tarnishes Israel’s image globally.
In an unusual interview in 2018, he voiced his belief that having a conflict with Israel would benefit no one, asking, “Who would wish to confront a nuclear-armed entity with nothing but slingshots?” The residents of Gaza have been grappling with the severe consequences of this situation over the past nearly year-long period.
Dr Vincent Durac specialises in Middle East politics, giving lectures at UCD’s politics and international relations faculty.