What is the history of Hamas and its role in the Middle East conflict?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Hamas emerged in the late 1980s as an Islamist offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and quickly combined social services with an armed wing that has fought Israel and governed Gaza since 2007; it carried out the October 7, 2023 attack that triggered a multi-year war and has been the central target of Israeli military operations and international counterterror measures (Congress Research Service, MEI, Reuters) [1] [2] [3]. Since 2023–2025 the group has suffered heavy losses, seen parts of Gaza contested with rival militias and Israeli forces, and shifted leadership patterns (five-man council after Yahya Sinwar’s death), while remaining dominant in Gaza and a core actor in any ceasefire or reconstruction negotiations [2] [4] [5].
1. Origins and ideological roots — an Islamist movement turned militant ruler
Hamas began as the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, combining religiously framed social services with political activism and an explicit rejection of Israel; over time it developed a military capacity—the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades—that carried out attacks against Israeli targets and positioned Hamas as both a resistance movement and a provider of welfare in Palestinian communities (available sources do not give a detailed founding date or founder names in the provided reporting; background summaries in MEI support the dual social/political/military role) [2].
2. From social services to armed conflict — building the military capability
By the 2000s Hamas had built a significant armed wing and underground infrastructure in Gaza. Analysts estimated the armed wing numbered tens of thousands of fighters before October 2023, and the organisation developed weapons production and tunnel networks that Israel later cited as targets; recent reporting and institute backgrounders say Hamas’s armed wing was estimated at roughly 20,000–30,000 fighters before October 2023 and reportedly drew many new recruits during the 2023–2025 conflict [2].
3. October 7, 2023 and the regional cascade
Hamas’s cross-border attack on October 7, 2023 brought the group to the centre of a wider Middle East crisis: Israeli military campaigns in Gaza, international diplomatic responses, and regional spillover with other actors were set in motion; U.S. and congressional policy shifted in response, and the conflict created a humanitarian and legal spotlight, including UN and court-level scrutiny of conduct by both Israel and Hamas (the US-designated terrorist status and the October 7 attack are noted by the Congressional Research Service; reporting links the 2023 attack to the later wars) [1].
4. Governance, repression, and control in Gaza
After winning elections and then fighting Fatah, Hamas took effective control of Gaza in 2007 and has since been the de facto authority there. Reporting during and after major campaigns documents that even when militarily weakened, Hamas has reasserted control in parts of Gaza, carried out reprisals against rival militias and accused collaborators, and remained the main governance actor for most Gazans—despite internal challenges and the emergence of other armed groups (Security Council report; New York Times on internal actions) [5] [6].
5. Leadership decapitation and collective management
Israeli strikes have repeatedly targeted Hamas leaders. The killing of Yahya Sinwar in 2024 and subsequent battlefield deaths forced Hamas to move from a single, well-known chief to a collective five-member council based in Doha, with figures such as Khalil al-Hayya taking prominent negotiating roles; reporting also documents successive losses among senior commanders through 2025 (Reuters and MEI explain the five-man council and leadership shifts) [4] [2].
6. Human cost, legal scrutiny, and international policy responses
The 2023–2025 war produced sharp international attention: UN organs and human-rights bodies investigated conduct by all parties and some UN processes characterized allegations against both Hamas and Israel, with calls for accountability; U.S. and other governments adopted sanctions and aid policy changes aimed at Hamas and groups that might finance it, including new U.S. legislation targeting Hamas financing (UN and Congressional reporting referenced in Wikipedia/CRS and MEI backgrounders; MEI notes U.S. legislative action) [7] [2] [1].
7. Regional networks and outside support — contested claims
Multiple sources link Iran and other regional actors to material support for Hamas over decades, though U.S. intelligence assessments in 2024 said Iranian leaders did not orchestrate the October 7 attack; Israeli intelligence and Israeli press have also alleged financial and logistical networks operating through third states to help Hamas rebuild capabilities—claims that feed regional tensions and policy debates (Congress report cites Iran’s material support historically and an assessment about orchestration; Israeli agencies’ claims about networks are reflected in contemporary press) [1] [8].
8. The present role — negotiating, fighting, and rebuilding power
In ceasefire and post-ceasefire dynamics Hamas remains the indispensable actor in Gaza: it negotiates hostage exchanges, exerts authority in western Gaza, and is accused of both rebuilding weapons capabilities and of violence against rivals in areas vacated by Israeli forces; at the same time Palestinian public opinion shows shifting attitudes toward Hamas and alternatives for Gaza governance, complicating the group’s long-term political prospects (Reuters and NYT describe Hamas roles in ceasefire contexts and strikes; Security Council reporting and Foreign Affairs polling show contested control and changing support) [4] [9] [5] [10].
Limitations and disagreements: available sources differ on casualty counts, the exact size of Hamas’s forces over time, and on the degree of external orchestration for large attacks—Congressional and intelligence summaries, MEI analysis, Reuters, NYT and UN reporting present competing details and emphases that matter for policy judgments [1] [2] [3] [7].
If you want, I can produce a concise timeline of key Hamas milestones drawn only from these sources or map the competing claims about external support and leadership responsibility with direct citations.