A few days ago, there was uproar on social media after Mousa Abu Marzouk, who heads Hamas’s International and Legal Relations Office, walked out of a television interview in protest over a question he was asked.
For those who missed the story, here’s what happened: The host asked Abu Marzouk whether Hamas had expected the October 7, 2023 operation to liberate Palestine. The question did not sit well with him, and he fulminated at the journalist.
“No sane person would believe that the October 7 operation, which involved 1,500 fighters, was going to liberate Palestine. I ask you to at least pose respectful questions.”
It is worth reminding ourselves that back in November, Abu Marzouk has himself told “The New York Times” that he would not have supported the October 7 attack on Israel if he had known how much destruction it would leave Gaza, adding that Hamas was ready to negotiate over the future of its arms.
At the time, the movement promptly issued a statement walking back Abu Marzouk’s remarks. His words have proved prophetic, as Hamas has now agreed to hand over its arms, and it has been thanking President Trump in every statement since the announcement of the Gaza ceasefire.
So, the question now is: Why the rage and indignation? Why were so many shocked when Abu Mazrouk says that “no sane person would believe that the October 7 operation, which involved 1,500 fighters, was going to liberate Palestine”?
If the outrage is over his comment to the host, “I ask you to pose at least respectful questions,” that’s hardly cause for astonishment. Since when have Hamas, Hezbollah, or any faction of this sort ever respected the media?
These factions know nothing but propaganda. They hide behind aliases on social media, issuing contradictory statements to the press officials. Abu Marzouk himself is one example: he makes a claim and then swiftly denies it and contradicts himself. His “New York Times” interview, for example, was divided into a discourse for the West, another for “the followers.”
That’s why I believe Abu Marzouk’s anger was not directed at the question itself, but at the farcical idea that October 7 had served any real purpose. I think he was, in fact, reprimanding the “followers” who were bewildered when Hamas accepted President Trump’s proposal and have since been spiraling.
Abu Marzouk knows well that propaganda machines can no longer conceal the facts. Gaza is in ruins; its people have been tormented by death, fear, and deprivation. Hamas’s leaders (Sinwar, his brother, Mohammed Deif, and even Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran) have been eliminated, and those who survived are now pleading for assurances that they won’t be next.
He and others have seen the assassination of Hassan Nasrallah and Hezbollah’s top brass, Bashar al-Assad’s escape, and the blows Iran suffered over just twelve days, with Israel only reined in because of Trump, whom Hamas now thanks day and night.
I am convinced that Abu Marzouk was less upset about the question itself than the naivete of “followers” on social media, in the media, and elsewhere: everyone who has now fallen silent in the face of the catastrophes unleashed by the insanity and recklessness of October 7.
So take it easy.
