Hamas has gained international sympathy that Al Qaeda never did
By Dehler Ingham ’27, Opinion Contributor
On Sept. 11, 2001, the United States stood still. In the aftermath, we saw an inspirational degree of unity; 73% of Americans called for military action and in late September, when announcing the War on Terror, the Bush administration saw its highest approval ratings ever at 86% (Pew Research Center). Patriotic sentiment was at a high as Americans united against evil in a time of tragedy. While the Bush administration ultimately fumbled this approval, making a mess of Iraq and Afghanistan, 9/11 remains a testament to the power tragedy has to unite and trigger a response. By angering the US, Al Qaeda facilitated their own eventual dissolution: doomed to the wrath of the world’s strongest military. Following the pogrom of Oct. 7, 2023, though, terrorist group Hamas plans to avoid a similar fate. While Israel has naturally seen immense unity following tragedy, the implications abroad are far more ambiguous and Hamas is all here for it.
The timing of Hamas’ attack was entirely purposeful. Pax Americana, the relative global peace caused by the post WWII United States has been waning since 9/11 and is now well and truly gone. The world is transitioning to multipolarity; the US has lost significant global footing and ambitious groups and nations are looking to fill that void. Hamas is no different. With America juggling an upcoming election, a disjointed legislative branch and mounting foreign concerns, Hamas (and, by large effect, Iran — aggressively anti-American and linked to Hamas) has struck at a time when unity is a distant reality and has exploited a place of poignant divisiveness in international and American discourse. Recent years have seen international sympathy towards the state of Palestine grow, as digital interconnectivity has exposed an increasingly apartheid state in the Holy Land. All the while, Hamas has espoused an anti-Israel, anti-Semitic and violent rhetoric since its formation in 1987. While Hamas are the de facto rulers of Gaza, it’s important to remember that their goals are not representative of the Palestinian people — in a July survey more than 50% of Gazans said they preferred a two-state solution based on 1967 borders (Washington Institute). Like Al Qaeda, Hamas is unequivocally an extremist terrorist organization.
Unlike Al Qaeda — a network oriented organization, training and equipping terrorsim from remote locales — Hamas rules over Gaza, one of the most discouraged and densely populated regions. Thus, Hamas is able to exploit the inevitability of civilian casualties, directing international sympathy towards Gaza. After warranting Israeli retaliation, they know their civilian shield will, as we are seeing, suffer the brunt of the violence. Hamas recognizes the leverage this gives them on an international stage and — as seen with the recent Gaza hospital explosion, when major news outlets reported falsely on its origins — are quick to exploit and twist Israel’s rightfully angered response to muddy the waters of opinion. They are stifling a united response to tragedy, a process that will further destabilize international security and American popularity, opening the floodgates to multipolarity and ushering in further global conflict. They are playing both the victim and the perpetrator: a child who murders his parents then pleads to the court on the case of being an orphan.
Hamas’ tactics are not either/or and our response shouldn’t be either. In a world where opinion is often facilitated by knee-jerk reactions, it can feel that if we don’t instantly take an explicit side, we are uninformed on the matter or, worse, indifferent to human suffering. The reality of it, though, is that if we don’t take the time to collectively nuance and validate our opinions, we become perpetrators of the divide that evil thrives in, and we diminish the power tragedy has to unite. At an institution dedicated to upholding discourse and action grounded in morality and facts, it’s important that we remember this as the weeks progress.
