What was Hamas thinking?
What was Hamas thinking?
What did Hamas expect to happen on Oct 7 and how did they expect to benefit?
This article was written March 27, 2024 in response to a question from a Canadian supporter of Israel. I decided to write it for a broader audience.
Question:
Many people ask: What was Hamas thinking on October 7?
Answer: I obviously don’t have inside knowledge but here are some ideas I’ve found:
Hamas Goals
Hamas Grievances
Hamas Oct 7 Expectations
Questions/Comments
Selected Reading
1) Hamas Oct 7: Goals
What was Hamas trying to achieve with the October 7 attacks, given that they would have expected some retaliation?
A) Hamas wanted to stop the Abraham Accords alliance that the Palestinians were being left out of.
Saudi Arabia and others were planning to join an alliance with Israel that would have left the Palestinians out, with little leverage. The Hamas attack brought Palestinians back to relevance and prevented an agreement from being signed, which would have left Palestinians isolated, with even fewer allies.1
B) Retaliate for Al Aqsa Mosque and West bank against settlers.
The Oct 7 attack was called “Al Aqsa Flood.” Israel has had conflicts with Muslims over the Al Aqsa Mosque on the temple mound. To think analogously, imagine if Muslims forces targeted worshipers at St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican with rubber bullets and tear gas. This would be quite a provocative event. There have been multiple clashes at Al Aqsa (the one with the golden dome). Hard-line Israelis are also talking about destroying Al Aqsa, the 3rd most holy mosque in the world, and building a new Jewish temple in its place, as Al Aqsa was build on the foundation of the old Jewish temple.
Settlers have also been also expanding settlement housing in the West Bank.
C) Swap hostages/prisoners:
Palestinians live under military rule which allows Israel to detain anyone without charge. This is a long-standing grievance that Hamas addresses periodically by taking their own hostages and then swapping the Israelis hostages for Palestinians. Some of the Palestinians have no charges against them (1000+ people), while others have serious charges, and some like Marwan Barghouti are considered political prisoners by Palestinians and terrorists by Israel.
D) Provoke a Counterproductive Israeli Response
One of the main goals of terrorism2 is to promote counter-productive outrage, like the US had after 9/11. President George W. Bush overreacted, leading the US to do much more damage to itself than Al Queda could ever do. I’m not a mindreader, but I would suspect Hamas’s strategy was designed to generate a reaction.3
Urban warfare has an equalizing effect for insurgency troops that can’t compete with high-tech weapons that the US and Israel have. It’s a similar strategy to Jui-Juitsu, where a smaller fighter who is trained on ground tactics can beat a larger opponent who is not. Israel was not trained in urban warfare and Hamas planned to take advantage of this weakness.
E) Divide & Rule: Internal Rivalry with Palestinian Authority
One of the dynamics going on with the Palestinians is an internal power struggle, whereby Hamas is attempting to assert the preeminence of the religious military wing of Palestinians over the secular, Palestinian authority. This rivalry is actually something Netanyahu is promoting through a divide and rule strategy that prevents the emergence of a unified Palestinian government. So long as the Palestinians are divided, Netanyahu can say there is no negotiating partner for peace.
F) Send a Message to Israelis:
This is the weakest goal — asserting relevance — saying, in effect: ~You can’t occupy us forever.~ ~You must compromise.~ ~We can project force beyond Gaza and attack you where you are.~ (New Yorker: Abu Marzouk)
2) Hamas Grievances:
There are too many other general Palestinian grievances to go over them all. Here I mean to highlight the few recent issues specific to Gaza.
A) Failure of the 2-state Solution: Slipping Away
Netanyahu and the settlers have made a contiguous Palestinian state impossible by building settlements at strategic locations throughout the West Bank. It has been compared to negotiating about how you’re going to split a pie while the other person is eating the pie.
The larger point is that the Oslo Accords proved that a much weaker party could not negotiate with a much stronger state. The alternative approach is to make claims under international law, rather than within the Oslo framework.
A Hamas member listed some recent ways he said Hamas tried to compromise but were rejected by Israel and the US.
B) Continued blockade actions
Although Israel doesn’t govern Gaza, they have Gaza surrounded and control what enters and exits.4
I know Israel says they are responding the Hamas rockets, etc., and
Hamas says that they are responding the the Israel blockade.
Each side sees theirs every action as a retaliation for the actions of the other side.
C) “Mowing the lawn:”
Israel has adopted a policy called “Mowing the Lawn” that involves attacking Gaza every few years. They did this in 2008-9, 2012, 2014, 2021, and now 2023-24. I created a video to humanize Gazans that highlighted this. This is an application of the Dahiya doctrine that aims to create “unbearable civilian suffering” with the hope that the civilians will pressure the militants. This is a violation of the Geneva Conventions and contradicts statements by spokesperson Mark Regev that Israel is doing everything possible to safeguard civilians.
D) Suppressing Peaceful Protest
During the Great March of Return (2018-19), Israeli troops shot (mostly) peaceful protesters killing 214 and wounding 36,100. Over 8000 of those injured were hit with live ammunition.5 (I expect this would lead Gazans to conclude that peaceful protest doesn't work, lending credence to those supporting armed rebellion)
3) Hamas Oct 7 Expectations:
According to British filmmaker Richard Sanders, Hamas didn't expect to "succeed" in their attack to such a degree:
Hamas people that have shared their experience of what happened on 7th of October with people I've spoken to suggested they expected a far higher casualty rate and expected that maybe 80, 90% of those who set out on the 7th of October would actually die as martyrs before they return back with hostages into Gaza City. The opposite actually happened — exactly diametrically opposed nearly in terms of only 10 to 15% of those fighters were killed before they made it into Israeli settlements. The resistance was so underwhelming from a Hamas point of view that they had absolute freedom to maneuver ( 16:16 ):
Once they "succeeded," in reaching the Kibbutz, they shot at everything that moved:
gunmen quickly penetrate civilian communities but their unexpected success exposes the limitations of Hamas as a military force once the gunmen get access to the kibbutz they really don't seem to know exactly what they're doing where they're going or what they want to achieve. They're wandering aimlessly. They're shouting to each other. They're arguing with each other. From the footage here looks like the soldiers clearly come under effective enemy fire. They're not doing anything about it. Yeah, this is complete chaos. Their first priority seems to be taking the ammunition and the weapons off their own wounded. There's no attempt of any sort of first aid. There's certainly not anything like one would term command and control. There's no leaders there ... (20:55)
But when they did achieve control over their victims, they took them hostage: 13:22
Those who say they should have expected a disproportionate Israeli response are right, but I don't think they expected the current response because I don't think they expected their attack to be so "successful."
On Israel's expected disproportionate response:
In 2006, when Israel wasn't able to defeat Hezbollah (Lebanon) militarily, they decided to attack civilian supporters of Hezbollah with massively disproportionate force, leveling blocks of civilian high rises in Dahiya, which is a suburb of Beirut. (The Dahiya Doctrine)
Israel then adopted that strategy of massive disproportionate force against Gaza, attacking in 2008-9, 2012, 2014, 2021, and now 2023 (5 times). They called it "Mowing the Grass":
the idea of repeatedly "conducting short, sharp military operations to maintain a certain level of control over the area without committing to a long-term political solution, similar to how one would mow a lawn to keep it neat and tidy"
How I view Hamas’s Attack
I do not agree with Hamas's attack. I expect when they planned the attack Hamas expected to kill fewer people and receive a smaller response. Now that it's complete, leadership would probably retroactively justify the attack on the grounds that few peoples achieved their independence without bloodshed.6 Vietnam lost millions in their war for independence, etc.
I don't think Hamas is in Palestinian's interest, but I think militants like them are often produced by societies that either don't have the tools, tradition, or opportunity to achieve their way with peaceful processes.
I created a video to humanize Gazans. It describes how Gazans (mostly) peacefully protested in 2018-19 for 18 months and the Israeli military attacked protesters with live ammunition killing 214 and wounding 36,100. Over 8000 of those injured were hit with live ammunition. That's the sort of thing that empowers the military wing of society and discourages peace supporters.
I myself am a Mennonite (pacifist) Christian. I grew up in the US thinking that the loyalists were more reasonable than the American revolutionaries. Americans did have real oppression, but it wasn't anything compared to the Gazans.
How would Americans act if they were in Palestinian’s place?
I sometimes ask Americans whether the US would declare war if a coffee cartel set the price of coffee at $15/cup. Many Americans say "Yes, we would declare war over coffee." Then I asked those who said “no” what they would do if the cartel also controlled chocolate? Virtually everyone agreed that the US would declare war over coffee and chocolate.
Gaza had been under blockade for over 15 years. Israel made a list of all the tings that were restricted, and then when that list got too long they switched to a list of things that were allowed. When they "put Gaza on a diet", their policies were so restrictive that Israel felt the need to calculate whether enough calories were entering to prevent malnutrition.
That is certainly a bigger grievance than a tax on tea (Boston Tea Party). I’d be curious to hear at what point you think Brits, Australians, or Canadians would take up arms?
Play dangerous games, risk dangerous outcomes:
Here in Pennsylvania, the Democratic Party helped a far-right Trump supporter named Doug Mastriano win the Republican Party nomination for Governor. The theory was that Mastriano would be easier to defeat than the more moderate Republican alternative in the general election. It really galled me that the party tried to then motivate the general electorate by imploring them about how Doug Mastriano was so extreme, when I knew that they had placed advertisements for him that used reverse psychology — telling Republican primary voters Mastriano is too "conservative," knowing that many Republican primary voters are more conservative than the typical voter and would take this use of reverse psychology as a type of endorsement.
The Democrats gambit paid off this election. Mastriano lost, but Netanyahu played a similar risky game with Gaza and lost, propping up Hamas.
Netanyahu's strategy was "divide and rule" -- by keeping the Palestinians divided, Netanyahu could prevent the emergence of an independent state (2 state solution).
Both Netanyahu and Hamas Miscalculated:
Netanyahu miscalculated by underestimating what Hamas was capable of (in the context of a massive intelligence failure and reassignment of forces to the West Bank.)
Hamas miscalculated by underestimating what effect their attack could have (in the context of a massive intelligence failure and reassignment of forces to the West Bank.)
It is my belief that Israel is miscalculating now as well, operating out of vengeance rather than enlightened self interest. I expect Israel would have invaded regardless, but they had the sympathy of the world and could have negotiated that Qatar cut off Hamas's funding and put pressure on Hamas’s arms imports. Now, much of the mideast "street" would oppose their leaders reining in Hamas.
I suppose that the counter-example is that this is similar to a “double-bind” — Israel loses if they don’t have a strong response (appear “weak”) and they lose if it is too harsh.
Terrorism Strategy
Hamas's strategy has some similarities with Osama bin Laden -- the US would have been much better off with a restrained response in Afghanistan. There are credible reports that the Taliban in Afghanistan were willing to hand bin Laden over7 but we (America) got swept up in a kinetic campaign where we got to use our MOAB (Mother of all Bombs) and then were drawn into a quagmire in Iraq). I assume bin Laden expected to die at some point. Even though he was killed, Osama bin Laden succeeded in provoking an American response that massively weakened the US.8
In terms of Hamas’s tactics, you could say that Muhammad Ali followed a similar path of taking a strategic beating with his "rope-a dope" strategy.
Rather than using the ropes to absorb the opponent’s blow, Hamas’s strategy it to go underground, allowing it to popup behind enemy lines.
Israel's tactics of massive aerial bombing has a US Army veteran commenting that Israel intends to commit the same mistakes as the US did in Iraq. Unfocused attacks only create more opponents.
If Americans were in the Palestinians Shoes?
When I talk to people, I try to put myself in their shoes, asking myself how I would feel if i were them, but also if I were Palestinian. I also ask them to put themselves in the Palestinians’ shoes.
I think most people who call for a harsh response against Palestinians would not adopt a peaceful approach if they were in Palestinians’ shoes.
Maybe Canadians are different than Americans, but I would foresee Americans rebelling a lot more, and a lot more readily if they were in the Palestinian's shoes. I'm not saying the Palestinians have had great leaders, but I think it's a mistake for Americans to assume they would be less militant than the Palestinians. Is there an argument that Americans would be more militant?
Despite my criticism of Israel's response to Oct 7, I also have a sympathetic view of the Jews that settled in Israel after the Holocaust.9 That will have to wait for another day, though, because this article is already too long.
4) Questions/Comments:
(Questions from a Canadian Israel supporter)
How it was this in the best interests of the Gazans they serve?
First, I’m not telling you here what I believe, but rather what I think Hamas and Gazans believe.
I think that the Gazan civilians do not see October 7 as unprovoked. Palestinians have a long list of provocations. For example, Israel goes into Gaza every few years as part of their “Mowing the Grass” campaign (2008-9, 2012, 2014, 2021) Israel sees this as part of their “deterrence,” but I expect Gazans see it as provocation. So when Hamas attacks Israel back in response and Israel retaliates by injuring and killing, Gazans blame Israel, just as the people of Israel blame Hamas, rather than the Israeli government for provoking Hamas.
Neither side sees what they do as provocation, only as retaliation, just the US has a “Defense” department and not an “Offense” department.
Some Gazans also have the attitude that it is better dying while fighting for freedom than living unfree. That has echoes of American “Founding Father” Patrick Henry.
» “Why everyone believes Israel would only invade if there were a handful of confirmed reports of sexual violence and not when 1200 of their citizens had been murdered and over 200 taken hostage?”
I didn’t mean to give the impression that Israel wouldn’t invade at all, only that:
if they attempt to level Gaza and starve the people to the same degree that they are doing, the US would step in.
In the past, the US restrained Israel after an initial period of fighting.
It’s my view that the effect of these “babies” and “mass rape” claims has been to render the US much less willing to restrain Israel and allowing Israel to starve Gazans with a blockade. If you listen to the rationales, given that rape is the number one excuse for war crimes and starvation. The reason why is that atrocity propaganda dehumanizes the Gazans, makes it possible for Israel to justify committing their own atrocities, and makes it easier for the New York Times to censor their news coverage.
We See Much more Coverage of Israel
I acknowledge I don't view as much of the official Palestinian side as I do the official Israeli news side because Palestinians don't have the same level of presence in the US/English language media. I have never heard a spokesperson from Gaza interviewed on “mainstream” US television, like I do Mark Regev or Elon Levy. I hear Levy is popular in Israel, but I find the Israel's spokespeople off-putting. (I also find the US spokespeople off-putting.) I would probably be offended by Hamas spokespeople too if there were any that appeared in US/British media (in English).
Many of my sources are American and Canadian Jews that are anti-Zionists like Aaron Mate, Katie Halper, Paul Jay (former CBC producer), Norman Finkelstein, and Max Blumenthal.
History Lens
I was a History major at the University of Waterloo and I look at the issue(s) through a historical lens. One of the common things that has happened historically in times of war and colonialism is that the warring or settling forces created "atrocity propaganda" to dehumanize their opposition. Once you have dehumanized the opposition, it gives you license to get away with your own atrocities.
The Nazis had to dehumanize the Jews to make it possible for ordinary Germans to commit a genocide. The whole "blood libel" history is about dehumanizing Jews for allegedly drinking the blood of children. Over time, those libels eventually result in atrocities/genocide.
Atrocity Propaganda Blowback
During World War I, some outrageous rhetoric regarding "babies" and "rape" was circulated by the British. This rhetoric was so discredited by the time of World War II that people wouldn't believe the real atrocities of the Nazis. (This demonstrates the dangers of the British crying "wolf" and hurting the Jews on the continent).
My interest in this is that I see a continuation of a historical pattern that I suspect is being used to:
distract from the real Israeli military and intelligence failure,10
excuse Israeli war crimes against Gazan civilians,
in pursuit of the long-standing ethnic cleansing goals held by a portion of right-wing Israelis
It will eventually become known that Israel's atrocity propaganda was untrue and it will backfire massively.11 Those who wield atrocity propaganda, reap what they sow. They:
generate new atrocities on their own side and later
generate atrocities against themselves, as part of a vicious circle.
ZAKA: Not necessarily a conspiracy
ZAKA could a big conspiracy, or it could be just opportunism by an organization in desperate need for money and eager for the limelight. ZAKA (who gathered the bodies) was a bankrupt organization on October 7. They found they could attract television time and donations with shocking stories:
ZAKA exploited Hamas’s October 7 attack to campaign for donations – report
Yossi Landau claimed to have photographic evidence of a stabbed baby, but when questioned, he responded by showing a photo demonstrating no such thing. (see video above)
Volunteers who worked alongside ZAKA accuse members of creating promotional content, inventing stories, and mishandling bodies in PR push
It also appears that they did take at least some photos, which seems at odds with their explanation why they didn't take photographic evidence of their claims:
The unit’s soldiers, as well as volunteers from other organizations, accused ZAKA volunteers of spreading stories of horrors that didn’t happen, releasing sensitive and graphic photos to shock people into donating, and being unprofessional in a bid for screen time. (link)
Note: Israeli spokesman Elon Levy promoted the "Medic's" false story about the Sharabi sisters to reporters. (Although he may not have known that the "witness" was not accurate.)
How to Handle: Testimony from those who have previously lied:
One of the disadvantages of the Pramila Patten report is that it does not provide much detail about who the witnesses are that they interviewed and exactly what was alleged. I have a hard time putting much credence in a witness if they said something that has been discredited before, like beheaded babies. For example, Sapir alleged that she saw 3 beheaded women. (All women's heads were accounted for). She seems to have also been (one of) the person/s who alleged a "gang rape." My response is to immediately put whatever she says under suspicion, but to still look to see if her accusation can unearth a pattern or some other lead. Same with Yossi Landa and other ZAKA members.
Prime Minister: A conspiracy?
Prime Minister Netanyahu reportedly met with ZAKA and told them that they were part of the war over public opinion, to "buy time." So taking into account their track record of outrageous false statements, I am willing to treat them as a potential source of leads, but I would need some other source to confirm what they say.
If you are being generous with Pramila Patten, she is looking for leads to establish a pattern. I still think the way she wrote the report makes it too easy for her “information gathering” to be misunderstood.
Confirmation: Naked women/Gang Rape?
» I also couldn't find anything in that petition about why those women's bodies were found stripped and bound by first responders or why all those people who attended the music festival are lying about seeing women being gang raped.
Who is making the claim and what is their evidence?
A British documentary maker, Richard Sanders, reports that he found no photos of naked women who were bound. (One may discount his testimony because Sanders created a documentary with Al Jazeera). However if there are video/photos, Israel would have an incentive to make it known that such photos exist and to provide them to him or to contradict his documentary. I also would expect that they would want to make evidence available to the New York Times to reduce the amount of criticism the Times is getting.
>> all those people who attended the music festival are lying about seeing women being gang raped.
I have not seen a large number of people who attended the music festival alleging that they saw women being gang raped. It may be one person, possibly Sapir, or from ZAKA. If you can identify those sources and what their evidence is, I'd be happy to look at it. Unfortunately the Pramila Patten report doesn't offer much transparency of sources, likely out of a desire to protect potential victims.
Pramila Patten:
I don't make the same assumptions you do about Pramilla Patten being either accurate or malicious.
It is not her job to investigate. Her Office's role is to "gather information" and perform "advocacy." (see my article for more about the UN Report)
Pramilla Patten's role is all fine and good, so long as people don't misinterpret her report as the result of an investigation. There is an official investigation underway but Israel has refused to cooperate, alleging the UN is biased. I am less willing to assume good faith on the part of the Israeli public relations team than I am of Patten. The Pramilla Patten group provides Israel with rudimentary "information gathering", while not having the mandate to do a full investigation. I don't assume Pramilla Patten is malicious, but it appears as though Israel would like something that appears to the uninitiated to be an investigation, but without actually being a real investigation.
» What information do you have that wasn't provided to the UN team who interviewed 30 odd witnesses, survivors, and first responders that makes you doubt their findings
I assume that Pramila Patten’s team hasn’t investigated much of the press information from independent media.
I assume that her report is done at the invitation of Israel using only their information.
5) Selected Reading:
Atlantic Council, Oct 16, 2023
A) What was Hamas thinking? And what is it thinking now?
New Yorker: Oct 13, 2024
One of the group’s senior political leaders explains its strategy.
NYMag, Jan. 11, 2024
C) What Does Hamas Actually Want?
Footnotes:
The Palestinians have the support of the “Arab Street” but not the leadership, who are mostly autocrats. For Arab leaders, Israel functions as a convenient scapegoat. The leaders don’t care about the Palestinians and use them as a convenient distraction to “let off steam” when the people are frustrated or angry.
I have heard of Hamas affiliates say the goal was not to attack civilians. They obviously did, which is what makes what they did terrorism.
I’ve actually heard that Al Queda was hoping the US would pull out of the middle east after 911.
Unicef. June 2022.
In June 2007, following the military takeover of Gaza by Hamas, the Israeli authorities significantly intensified existing movement restrictions, virtually isolating the Gaza Strip from the rest of the occupied Palestinian territory (oPt), and the world. This land, sea and air blockade has significantly exacerbated previous restrictions, limiting the number and specified categories of people and goods allowed in and out through the Israeli-controlled crossings.
United Nations. 6 April 2020.
Israeli forces responded by shooting tear gas canisters, some of them dropped from drones, rubber bullets and live ammunition, mostly by snipers. As a result, 214 Palestinians, including 46 children, were killed, and over 36,100, including nearly 8,800 children have been injured. One in five of those injured (over 8,000) were hit by live ammunition.[3] During the same period, one Israeli soldier was killed and seven others were injured during the demonstrations.
Canada was able to gain independence without a war, partly because the British were more inclined to do so than they were to let the US go in 1776.
I’ve heard the suggestion that it would have been a lot cheaper and saved lives if the US would have gotten bin Laden turned over and tried, and then build 2,996 hospitals across Afghanistan, one for each person killed in 9/11.
An estimate by Brown University: The War on Terror cost $8 trillion. I don’t think that includes future healthcare, veteran benefits, and interest costs.
One of the things I observe about the situation in Israel/Palestine is the extraordinary amount of historical“bad faith.” More on that later.
Atrocity propaganda diverts outrage away from Israeli military and intelligence failures.
Or conversely, one could argue that Iraq WMD claims did not blow back sufficiently on those who made them.