Hamas is a terrorist group

Checked on February 6, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

Hamas meets commonly used legal and policy definitions of a terrorist organization in many jurisdictions because it has carried out deliberate attacks on civilians, including suicide bombings and rocket strikes, and has been designated as a terrorist entity by the United States and dozens of other states and bodies [1] [2] [3]. At the same time, significant governments and international forums have resisted or not adopted a universal label, and Hamas itself and some regional backers portray it as a political and resistance movement — a divergence that keeps the designation politically contested [4] [5].

1. The factual core: violent attacks on civilians and formal U.S. designation

Hamas has a documented history of directing violence against civilian populations, including suicide bombings and rocket and mortar barrages that have injured and killed noncombatants, conduct that fits standard legal definitions of terrorism used by many states [1] [2]. Reflecting that behavior, the U.S. government placed Hamas on its Foreign Terrorist Organization list beginning in 1997 and has designated associated leaders and funders as terrorist entities or specially designated global terrorists at multiple points, including Treasury actions to freeze assets of charities linked to Hamas [2] [6].

2. Widespread—but not universal—international labeling

Dozens of countries and international bodies have applied terrorist labels or sanctions to Hamas in whole or in part: the European Union, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan and others have used legal or sanction regimes against Hamas or its military wing, while some states restrict the label to the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades rather than the entire movement [3] [1] [7]. At the same time, only a minority of U.N. member states have formally proscribed Hamas, and attempts at a U.N. designation have failed to reach required thresholds in key votes, underscoring that the label carries geopolitical as well as legal meaning [1] [8].

3. How designations are made and why they matter

Countries use differing legal frameworks to define and proscribe terrorist groups—U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organization status is grounded in the Immigration and Nationality Act and criminalizes material support, while EU or national sanctions regimes operate under other authorities—so a group's being on one list but not another reflects legal and political differences rather than pure factual disagreement [9] [3]. These designations have concrete consequences: asset freezes, criminal exposure for supporters, limits on diplomatic engagement, and pressure on backers, which is why states often weigh political fallout as well as evidence when deciding how to label an actor [9] [6].

4. Competing narratives: liberation movement vs. terrorist organization

Hamas and many of its sympathizers present the organization as a liberation and resistance movement rooted in Palestinian politics and social services, claiming a political mandate and governance role in Gaza — a narrative that underpins some states’ reluctance to apply a blanket “terrorist” label [4] [3]. Conversely, governments that emphasize Hamas’s deliberate targeting of civilians and hostage-taking argue the organization’s methods place it squarely within terrorism definitions; this is the rationale cited in congressional letters and diplomatic pushes to expand multilateral designation [10] [11].

5. The verdict, with caveats: designation is real but not universal

By legal and policy standards used by the United States and many Western and allied governments, Hamas is a terrorist organization because of its sustained, intentional attacks on civilians and associated networks for funding and leadership that have been formally sanctioned [2] [6] [3]. The label is not globally unanimous, however: significant states and institutions either stop short of a universal designation or apply measures only to Hamas’s armed wing, and U.N. attempts at a full consensus have failed, so the term remains as much political as it is juridical [1] [5].

Want to dive deeper?
Which countries currently list only Hamas's military wing as a terrorist organization, and what legal differences does that create?
How have Hamas's social services and political governance in Gaza affected international responses and sanctions policy?
What are the legal consequences for individuals and charities found to provide material support to groups designated as terrorist organizations like Hamas?