Hostages as Leverage: What Is Hamas' Gamble in Gaza?

Fighters from Hamas in Khan Younis on February 20. (Reuters)
Fighters from Hamas in Khan Younis on February 20. (Reuters)
TT
20

Hostages as Leverage: What Is Hamas' Gamble in Gaza?

Fighters from Hamas in Khan Younis on February 20. (Reuters)
Fighters from Hamas in Khan Younis on February 20. (Reuters)

Despite heavy setbacks since the start of Israel's war on Gaza in October 2023, Hamas continues to project defiance and resilience against the Jewish state.

In recent days, the group has pursued a political track despite a surprise Israeli strikes on Gaza early on Tuesday that killed hundreds of Palestinians, including several Hamas leaders and fighters.

The group held back from a military response until the third day of the renewed escalation, launching only three rockets toward Tel Aviv.

Analysts say both sides are using military pressure to gain leverage, particularly after Israel expanded its limited ground operations in key areas, including the Netzarim corridor, which separates northern Gaza from its central and southern regions.

Since the war began, Hamas has relied on its main bargaining chip—the Israeli hostages in its custody.

The group surprised Tel Aviv with the number of living captives, a fact revealed during the first phase of a ceasefire that began on January 19 and lasted 42 days before continuing unofficially.

Tensions escalated again after 58 days, culminating in a series of assassinations targeting senior Hamas figures.

Despite the Israeli attacks, Hamas continues to prioritize the political route, holding firm to its key bargaining chip—the Israeli hostages.

The group remains confident that the hostages represent its strongest leverage, especially as it monitors developments within Israeli society, particularly the pressure from families of the captives on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government.

This pressure is mounting for the government to pursue a prisoner swap, alongside Israel's clear intent to use military force to recover the hostages. Hamas sees this as a strategic opportunity.

Sources within Hamas told Asharq Al-Awsat that the group has numerous cards to play and believes these could ultimately force Israel to accept a permanent ceasefire. While the Israeli captives are a pivotal factor, they are not the only leverage Hamas holds.

The sources added that the group has military tactics at its disposal, which could be employed on the ground if negotiations fail and reach a deadlock.

Hamas aims to avoid appearing weak both to Israel and the Palestinian public, insisting on the withdrawal of Israeli forces from all parts of Gaza, including the Salah al-Din, or Philadelphi, corridor.

Sources within Hamas stress that the group has no option but to restore Gaza to its pre-October 7, 2023, status to secure breathing space. Once that is achieved, Hamas would be open to transferring power to the Palestinian Authority or to a government formed through national Palestinian consensus.

Hamas is betting on its ability to retain control over Gaza, despite Israeli strikes, allowing it to claim that it has thwarted efforts to topple its rule.

Over 15 months of military conflict, Israel has failed to completely dismantle Hamas's military and governance capabilities.

While the group was forced to operate in a limited capacity due to Israeli efforts to target its leaders at various levels, it regained strength in areas from which Israeli forces withdrew.

Furthermore, Hamas quickly regained momentum after the ceasefire, as evidenced by the resumption of its government ministries, political bodies, and the military wing: the al-Qassam Brigades. This was particularly evident during the handover of Israeli captives.

Hamas appears to rely on its continued support base in Gaza, despite heavy losses, and remains firm in refusing to compromise on certain demands.

Sources within Hamas told Asharq Al-Awsat that it is natural for the group to rely on its loyalist base in Gaza to continue resisting Israel.

This strategy is not new for Palestinian factions, which have faced significant setbacks over decades but have consistently emerged stronger and more resilient after each blow.

Hamas acknowledges that the situation in Gaza may have changed after the war, but likens it to Israel's Operation Defensive Shield in the West Bank in 2002.

While Israel succeeded in dismantling many Palestinian factions' cells at the time, those groups later re-emerged and became active again. This, the sources say, underscores the failure of Israel's military approach, which has never decisively won any battle.

Recently, Hamas has sought to demonstrate its strength in Gaza's streets. Dozens of its fighters took part in military displays, and members of its police and security forces were seen conducting arrests of suspects involved in both criminal and security-related activities.

The group also reactivated new and partially damaged facilities for its security forces.

During the first phase of the ceasefire, which lasted 42 days and extended for an additional 16 days due to efforts to prolong the agreement, Asharq Al-Awsat observed an increase in Gaza residents visiting police stations to file complaints, including some related to criminal cases.

Civilian staff from various ministries also carried out tasks, such as monitoring market prices.

After recent assassinations and the resumption of fighting by Israel, the future actions of Hamas remain uncertain, particularly if the current wave of violence continues.

Hamas leaders from various political, military, and governmental levels have once again gone into hiding, and the group has struggled to control rising market prices, which has significantly impacted ordinary Gazans.

Sources within Hamas told Asharq Al-Awsat that the assassinated leaders—such as Issam al-Daalis, Yasser Harb, and Mohamed al-Jamasi—were crucial in restructuring the group's organizational and governmental operations.

This suggests that Israel has dealt a significant blow to Hamas by targeting key leaders who were tasked with revitalizing the movement and regaining full control over Gaza once the war ends.

Many believe that Hamas's popularity has waned, even among some of its supporters, due to the devastating impact of the war on Palestinians and Israel's threats of further displacement. Additionally, there is increasing public criticism of Hamas' October 7, 2023, attack, with some questioning the disastrous consequences it has had for the Palestinian people.

Despite a decline in both its popularity and legitimacy, some view Hamas's potential willingness to cede power not as a sign of weakness but as an effort to avoid a larger, more prolonged conflict that could decimate the remaining leadership and active members of the group.

Hamas sources maintain that the group's leadership is united in its readiness to relinquish control, but only if there is a national consensus.

This decision, they insist, will not be made in response to Israeli or US pressure to remove the group from the Palestinian political landscape.

The group remains focused on preventing further conflict for Gaza's residents, emphasizing that their primary concern is not just their own survival but the well-being of the population, according to Hamas sources.

Some analysts believe that Hamas will remain a key player in Palestinian politics for many years to come, whether publicly or in the shadows—even if it steps down from governing Gaza after the current war.



As the UN Turns 80, Its Crucial Humanitarian Aid Work Faces a Clouded Future

Students in an English class at a primary school run by URWA for Palestinian refugees at the Mar Elias refugee camp in Beirut, Lebanon, Monday, June 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)
Students in an English class at a primary school run by URWA for Palestinian refugees at the Mar Elias refugee camp in Beirut, Lebanon, Monday, June 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)
TT
20

As the UN Turns 80, Its Crucial Humanitarian Aid Work Faces a Clouded Future

Students in an English class at a primary school run by URWA for Palestinian refugees at the Mar Elias refugee camp in Beirut, Lebanon, Monday, June 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)
Students in an English class at a primary school run by URWA for Palestinian refugees at the Mar Elias refugee camp in Beirut, Lebanon, Monday, June 2, 2025. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)

At a refugee camp in northern Kenya, Aujene Cimanimpaye waits as a hot lunch of lentils and sorghum is ladled out for her and her nine children — all born while she has received United Nations assistance since fleeing her violence-wracked home in Congo in 2007.

“We cannot go back home because people are still being killed,” the 41-year-old said at the Kakuma camp, where the UN World Food Program and UN refugee agency help support more than 300,000 refugees, The Associated Press said.

Her family moved from Nakivale Refugee Settlement in neighboring Uganda three years ago to Kenya, now home to more than a million refugees from dozens of conflict-hit east African countries.

A few kilometers (miles) away at the Kalobeyei Refugee Settlement, fellow Congolese refugee Bahati Musaba, a mother of five, said that since 2016, “UN agencies have supported my children’s education — we get food and water and even medicine,” as well as cash support from WFP to buy food and other basics.

This year, those cash transfers — and many other UN aid activities — have stopped, threatening to upend or jeopardize millions of lives.

As the UN marks its 80th anniversary this month, its humanitarian agencies are facing one of the greatest crises in their history: The biggest funder — the United States — under the Trump administration and other Western donors have slashed international aid spending. Some want to use the money to build up national defense.

Some UN agencies are increasingly pointing fingers at one another as they battle over a shrinking pool of funding, said a diplomat from a top donor country who spoke on condition of anonymity to comment freely about the funding crisis faced by some UN agencies.

Such pressures, humanitarian groups say, diminish the pivotal role of the UN and its partners in efforts to save millions of lives — by providing tents, food and water to people fleeing unrest in places like Myanmar, Sudan, Syria and Venezuela, or helping stamp out smallpox decades ago.

“It’s the most abrupt upheaval of humanitarian work in the UN in my 40 years as a humanitarian worker, by far,” said Jan Egeland, a former UN humanitarian aid chief who now heads the Norwegian Refugee Council. “And it will make the gap between exploding needs and contributions to aid work even bigger.”

‘Brutal’ cuts to humanitarian aid programs UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has asked the heads of UN agencies to find ways to cut 20% of their staffs, and his office in New York has floated sweeping ideas about reform that could vastly reshape the way the United Nations doles out aid.

Humanitarian workers often face dangers and go where many others don’t — to slums to collect data on emerging viruses or drought-stricken areas to deliver water.

The UN says 2024 was the deadliest year for humanitarian personnel on record, mainly due to the war in Gaza. In February, it suspended aid operations in the stronghold of Yemen’s Houthi group, who have detained dozens of UN and other aid workers.

Proponents say UN aid operations have helped millions around the world affected by poverty, illness, conflict, hunger and other troubles.

Critics insist many operations have become bloated, replete with bureaucratic perks and a lack of accountability, and are too distant from in-the-field needs. They say postcolonial Western donations have fostered dependency and corruption, which stifles the ability of countries to develop on their own, while often UN-backed aid programs that should be time-specific instead linger for many years with no end in sight.

In the case of the Nobel Peace Prize-winning WFP and the UN’s refugee and migration agencies, the US has represented at least 40% of their total budgets, and Trump administration cuts to roughly $60 billion in US foreign assistance have hit hard. Each UN agency has been cutting thousands of jobs and revising aid spending.

“It's too brutal what has happened,” said Egeland, alluding to cuts that have jolted the global aid community. “However, it has forced us to make priorities ... what I hope is that we will be able to shift more of our resources to the front lines of humanity and have less people sitting in offices talking about the problem.”

With the UN Security Council's divisions over wars in Ukraine and the Middle East hindering its ability to prevent or end conflict in recent years, humanitarian efforts to vaccinate children against polio or shelter and feed refugees have been a bright spot of UN activity. That's dimming now.

Not just funding cuts cloud the future of UN humanitarian work

Aside from the cuts and dangers faced by humanitarian workers, political conflict has at times overshadowed or impeded their work.

UNRWA, the aid agency for Palestinian refugees, has delivered an array of services to millions — food, education, jobs and much more — in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan as well as in the West Bank and Gaza since its founding in 1948.

Israel claims the agency's schools fan antisemitic and anti-Israel sentiment, which the agency denies. Israel says Hamas siphons off UN aid in Gaza to profit from it, while UN officials insist most aid gets delivered directly to the needy.

“UNRWA is like one of the foundations of your home. If you remove it, everything falls apart,” said Issa Haj Hassan, 38, after a checkup at a small clinic at the Mar Elias Palestinian refugee camp in Beirut.

UNRWA covers his diabetes and blood pressure medication, as well as his wife’s heart medicine. The United States, Israel's top ally, has stopped contributing to UNRWA; it once provided a third of its funding. Earlier this year, Israel banned the aid group, which has strived to continue its work nonetheless.

Ibtisam Salem, a single mother of five in her 50s who shares a small one-room apartment in Beirut with relatives who sleep on the floor, said: “If it wasn’t for UNRWA we would die of starvation. ... They helped build my home, and they give me health care. My children went to their schools.”

Especially when it comes to food and hunger, needs worldwide are growing even as funding to address them shrinks.

“This year, we have estimated around 343 million acutely food insecure people,” said Carl Skau, WFP deputy executive director. “It’s a threefold increase if we compare four years ago. And this year, our funding is dropping 40%. So obviously that’s an equation that doesn’t come together easily.”

Billing itself as the world's largest humanitarian organization, WFP has announced plans to cut about a quarter of its 22,000 staff.

The aid landscape is shifting

One question is how the United Nations remains relevant as an aid provider when global cooperation is on the outs, and national self-interest and self-defense are on the upswing.

The United Nations is not alone: Many of its aid partners are feeling the pinch. Groups like GAVI, which tries to ensure fair distribution of vaccines around the world, and the Global Fund, which spends billions each year to help battle HIV, tuberculosis and malaria, have been hit by Trump administration cuts to the US Agency for International Development.

Some private-sector, government-backed groups also are cropping up, including the divisive Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which has been providing some food to Palestinians. But violence has erupted as crowds try to reach the distribution sites.

The future of UN aid, experts say, will rest where it belongs — with the world body's 193 member countries.

“We need to take that debate back into our countries, into our capitals, because it is there that you either empower the UN to act and succeed — or you paralyze it,” said Achim Steiner, administrator of the UN Development Program.