Hamas: A political movement, but don’t mind the rockets

There’s a charade that persists in diplomatic circles, particularly in the West, that there’s a clear distinction between the “political” and “military” wings of organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah. This notion, comfortably entertained by those far removed from the realities on the ground, suggests that while one arm is busy planting bombs, the other is engaging in polite debates over tea and biscuits. It’s a comforting thought for diplomats who prefer their villains well-dressed and well-spoken, even if their ideologies are steeped in violence.

Hamas terror group leader Yahya Sinwar holds the child of an Al-Qassam Brigades member, who was killed in the recent fighting with Israel, during a rally in Gaza City on May 24, 2021. (Emmanuel DUNAND / AFP)

Recently, this charade was thrown into sharp relief when Hamas, that ever-so-misunderstood “political movement,” appointed Yahya Sinwar as its new “political head.” Now, if the name doesn’t ring a bell, allow me to jog your memory. Sinwar is widely recognized as the architect behind the gruesome events of October 7—a day marked by unspeakable atrocities. But let’s not be hasty in our judgment. After all, isn’t everyone entitled to a little career diversification? One day you’re masterminding terror attacks, the next you’re shaking hands and posing for photo ops. It’s all in a day’s work for a political leader, right?

For years, Western diplomats and media have danced around this convenient separation, as though slapping the label “political wing” on a group could somehow cleanse it of its darker deeds. It’s like insisting that the shark from Jaws was just misunderstood and had a softer, more reasonable side we never got to see. Perhaps, had we offered it a seat at the UN, it would have taken up a more “civilized” pursuit—like nibbling on canapés instead of swimmers.

But let’s not be too harsh. We must appreciate the skill with which these groups have managed to play this game. After all, it’s not easy to convince the world that your organization, which regularly features in global terrorism reports, has a legitimate political arm. This requires a level of cognitive dissonance that borders on the miraculous. Perhaps we should be awarding them not sanctions, but Oscars for their performances in this ongoing theater of the absurd.

Imagine the scene: a Western diplomat, armed with nothing but a briefcase full of hope and naiveté, sits across from Sinwar, ready to engage in “meaningful dialogue.” Sinwar, perhaps still brushing the dust off his hands from the last rocket launch, smiles warmly and assures the diplomat that Hamas is committed to peace—right after they finish up a few “military” matters. It’s a bit like negotiating with a pyromaniac while they’re holding a lit match; you just hope they don’t decide to toss it before the paperwork is signed.

This isn’t to say that political movements can’t have militant wings. History is full of examples where armed resistance was part of a broader struggle for legitimate political goals. But equating those examples with groups like Hamas is to ignore the elephant in the room—a heavily armed elephant with a penchant for targeting civilians.

The reality, inconvenient as it may be for some, is that the so-called political and military wings of Hamas are not separate entities but two sides of the same coin. One provides the rhetoric, the other the firepower, and both are driven by the same ideology—an ideology that leaves little room for peace and plenty for violence.

Let’s stop fooling ourselves into thinking that a new title or a different hat somehow changes the nature of the beast. The appointment of Yahya Sinwar as the new “political head” of Hamas is not a sign of a group evolving towards moderation. It’s a clear statement that their political agenda is inseparable from their militant activities. It’s like putting a wolf in a suit and calling it a sheepdog. Sure, it might look the part, but you’ll still end up with a lot of missing sheep.

This window-dressing nonsense is not just misleading; it’s dangerous. It allows terrorist organizations to masquerade as legitimate political actors, gaining international recognition and resources that should be denied to those who engage in terror. It’s high time we see these groups for what they are—not through the rose-tinted glasses of political convenience, but through the clear lens of reality.

In the end, whether they are sitting at a negotiation table or hiding in a bunker, the goal of Hamas remains the same: to murder and destroy. Let’s not pretend otherwise. The distinction between political and military wings is a farce, one that only gullible diplomats could believe. And it’s time we all stopped playing along with this deadly game of make-believe.