Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision-making has often been a subject of intense debate, but his current approach to dealing with Hamas could prove to be one of his most consequential gambles. By allowing Hamas to claim symbolic and strategic victories, Netanyahu risks reshaping the Palestinian leadership landscape in ways that could destabilize the region for years to come. The January 15, 2025, statement by Hamas, shared on its Telegram channel is a clear indicator of the group’s growing confidence. Hamas declared its achievements as “the fruit of the legendary steadfastness of our great Palestinian people and our valiant resistance in the Gaza Strip for more than 15 months.”
This declaration was not just rhetoric; it was a strategic move aimed at cementing Hamas’s reputation as the champion of Palestinian resistance. For Palestinians, this messaging sharply contrasts with the stagnation of the Palestinian Authority (PA) under President Mahmoud Abbas. The PA, struggling with internal corruption and a lack of tangible progress, appears increasingly irrelevant. Netanyahu’s policies are unintentionally amplifying this contrast, effectively strengthening Hamas in the ongoing leadership struggle for the Palestinian territories.
Hamas vs. the Palestinian Authority
The Palestinian Authority, established under the Oslo Accords, was envisioned as a stepping stone toward Palestinian self-determination. However, under Abbas’s leadership, it has become a symbol of inaction and inefficacy. Abbas’s inability to secure concessions from Israel or improve the lives of ordinary Palestinians has eroded public trust in the PA. In contrast, Hamas has seized every opportunity to present itself as the protector of Palestinian dignity and resistance.
By portraying itself as the vanguard of resistance, Hamas has positioned itself as a viable alternative to the PA. Its narrative is simple yet effective: while the PA engages in fruitless negotiations, Hamas fights for Palestinian rights and achieves victories, however symbolic. The January 15 statement reinforces this narrative, declaring victory not just for Hamas but for the Palestinian people as a whole. For many Palestinians, this resonates deeply, especially amid widespread frustration with the PA’s perceived impotence.
Israel’s Miscalculation
Israel’s strategy appears to rest on the belief that it can manage Hamas as a contained threat, akin to a game of whack-a-mole. This assumption is dangerously flawed. Despite Israel’s efforts to hermetically seal Gaza, Hamas has built a multibillion-dollar terror infrastructure, proving its ability to adapt and thrive even under extreme pressure. This infrastructure includes extensive tunnel networks, sophisticated weaponry, and a robust propaganda machine.
If Hamas can achieve this level of operational success in Gaza, a heavily monitored and blockaded territory, its potential to expand into the West Bank is a significant concern. The West Bank’s porous borders, mountainous terrain, and proximity to Jordan create a favorable environment for infiltration and weapons smuggling. Hamas’s ability to establish a foothold in the West Bank would drastically alter the security dynamics of the region, making it far more challenging for Israel to maintain control.
The Role of Jordan
Jordan’s position in this equation is particularly precarious. While Jordanian officials may offer intelligence and limited cooperation to Israel, the kingdom faces its own challenges. Historically, countries like Egypt have struck a devil’s bargain with Hamas: allowing weapons smuggling in exchange for assurances that Hamas will not target their regimes. Jordan may be tempted to follow a similar path, turning a blind eye to Hamas’s activities to avoid domestic unrest or retaliation.
Queen Rania’s lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill further underscore the complexities of Jordan’s stance. Reports suggest that she advocated for Hamas’s position during private meetings with U.S. senators, shocking many with her apparent defense of the group. This highlights the kingdom’s internal contradictions and its reluctance to take a hardline stance against Hamas, even as the group’s activities pose a direct threat to regional stability.
The Succession Crisis in the Palestinian Authority
The Palestinian Authority is on the brink of a leadership crisis. Mahmoud Abbas, now in his late 80s, has been in power since 2005 and shows no signs of preparing a successor. His eventual departure will leave a vacuum that the forces of altruism and civil society are unlikely to fill. In this context, Hamas is well-positioned to capitalize on the chaos.
Public opinion in the Palestinian territories will play a crucial role. Hamas has spent years building a reputation as a credible alternative to the PA, not just militarily but also as a provider of social services and governance in Gaza. This dual strategy has earned it significant support among Palestinians who feel abandoned by the PA.
Once Abbas is gone, Hamas’s organizational discipline and ideological clarity will give it a significant advantage. Unlike the fragmented PA, Hamas operates with a unified vision and a clear agenda, making it a formidable contender for leadership in the Palestinian territories.
Regional Implications
The implications of a Hamas takeover in the West Bank are profound. Such a development would embolden hardliners within the group, strengthen its alliances with Iran and other regional actors, and further isolate moderate Palestinian voices. For Israel, it would mean a two-front conflict: dealing with Hamas in both Gaza and the West Bank, a scenario that would stretch its military and intelligence capabilities to their limits.
Moreover, a Hamas-led Palestinian leadership would complicate Israel’s relationships with neighboring countries and international stakeholders. The prospect of a more radicalized Palestinian leadership could derail any remaining hopes for a two-state solution, leaving both Israelis and Palestinians trapped in an endless cycle of violence and mistrust.
Netanyahu’s Strategic Missteps
Netanyahu’s approach appears to be guided by short-term political calculations rather than a coherent long-term strategy. By allowing Hamas to claim victories, he undermines the PA and inadvertently strengthens his most determined adversary. This approach may serve immediate political goals, such as deflecting attention from domestic challenges or consolidating support among right-wing voters, but its long-term consequences are dire.
The gamble of promoting Hamas as a counterweight to the PA is not new. Israel has historically played a role in enabling Hamas’s rise, initially seeing the group as a foil to the secular PLO. However, this strategy has repeatedly backfired, and the current situation is no exception. By empowering Hamas, Netanyahu risks creating a more dangerous and unpredictable adversary, one that could eventually destabilize the entire region.
A Call for Rethinking Strategy
Israel must reassess its approach to Hamas and the Palestinian leadership crisis. While immediate security concerns are paramount, they should not come at the expense of long-term stability. Strengthening the PA, despite its flaws, remains a more viable option than allowing Hamas to consolidate power. This requires renewed international efforts to support Palestinian institutions, promote economic development, and address the underlying grievances that fuel extremism.
At the same time, Israel must work to counter Hamas’s influence in the West Bank through intelligence, counterterrorism operations, and strategic partnerships with regional allies. Jordan, in particular, must be held accountable for its role in preventing Hamas’s infiltration. The international community, too, has a role to play, pressuring regional actors to take a firm stance against Hamas’s activities.
Netanyahu’s policies may achieve short-term gains, but they come with long-term risks that could reshape the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in dangerous ways. By allowing Hamas to claim symbolic and strategic victories, he empowers a group that thrives on resistance and undermines the fragile status quo in the Palestinian territories.
As the PA edges closer to a leadership vacuum, Hamas stands ready to fill the gap, with far-reaching implications for regional security. Israel must recognize the dangers of its current approach and pursue a strategy that prioritizes stability, dialogue, and the containment of extremism. Failure to do so risks turning the West Bank into the next Gaza—and entrenching a cycle of conflict that will be even harder to break.
