Hamas is far from gone from Gaza, little progress has been made on 19 out of Trump’s 20 points in his plan and not all of the hostages’ remains have been returned. Is Hamas winning?
I sometimes wonder what would happen if Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar came back to life. What would he think of Gaza today? Would he believe that he lost the war, or would he think that Hamas won?
On the one hand, yes, he is dead. Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh are gone too, along with almost every mid-to-senior Hamas commander in Gaza. The group’s rocket arsenal is depleted, its command structure is shattered, and at least half of its tunnels are destroyed. The IDF still controls about half of Gaza’s territory, with no withdrawal in sight. Militarily, Hamas has been broken. Still, as we’ve seen in recent weeks, Hamas is far from gone. Its armed men, wearing masks and green headbands, are back on the streets of Gaza, reasserting control, policing the population, and reminding everyone that the organization might have been beaten as an army but not erased.
Nearly three weeks have passed since US President Donald Trump unveiled his 20-point plan. Yet little progress has been made on any of the 19 remaining points, and even the first point – the release of the hostages – remains incomplete. The spectacle this week of Hamas staging the “discovery” of a hostage’s remains and inviting the Red Cross to film it was a stark reminder that it continues to manipulate both Israel and the international community.
Trump’s plan envisioned a post-Hamas Gaza, with a new governing body composed of technocrats unaffiliated with the terrorist group, supported by an International Stabilization Force deployed to maintain security. But none of this has materialized. The countries that had pledged support for the ISF are hesitating. They first want to see whether Hamas will be removed. In the absence of that, a dangerous vacuum is forming, and Hamas is filling it.
It’s worth remembering the objectives that Sinwar set out when he orchestrated the October 7 invasion. He wanted to derail the normalization agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, and on that front, he has succeeded. Even with the ceasefire in place, normalization still feels distant, especially given the current Israeli government’s refusal to declare support for a political process with the Palestinians, something the Saudis are demanding.
Sinwar also wanted to bring the Palestinian issue back onto the global agenda. On that count, too, he succeeded beyond his imagination. Despite October 7 being the greatest massacre of Jews in a single day since the Holocaust, Gaza has become a rallying cry for people across the Western world. The sight of young men and women marching through Western capitals draped in keffiyehs, chanting “Free Palestine,” and calling for Israel’s elimination proves that he has achieved that goal.
Did the attack weaken Israel? On October 7, it did, but two years later, Israel is arguably more secure. Hamas and Hezbollah have sustained devastating blows. Iran is on the defensive, and its nuclear facilities have been destroyed. The Assad regime was toppled in Syria. Yet politically, Sinwar managed to shift the global narrative. The Palestinian cause has once again become the calling for much of the progressive West. France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Canada, Belgium, and Australia have all recognized a Palestinian state, even while Israeli hostages were still being held alive in Hamas captivity.
So, is Hamas winning or losing? The answer is not simple. For now, Trump remains committed to what he calls the “peace” he brokered after a “3,000-year conflict.” But this is hardly peace. It is a ceasefire barely staying together, and as Hamas continues to violate its terms, it becomes harder for Israel to justify staying quiet. This week illustrated that complexity: After Hamas played with the remains of a hostage, it ambushed an IDF unit in Rafah, killing reservist Yona Feldbaum. Israel struck back, but only after coordinating with Washington. Within a day, the ceasefire was reinstated.
The question is, what happens the next time Hamas violates the terms – either again delaying the return of hostages or again attacking IDF troops? Will the world back Israel’s right to respond, or will it pressure Jerusalem to withdraw entirely, arguing that if Israel were not in Gaza, maybe Hamas would stop attacking? Sadly, we already know the answer. The same voices that demanded restraint on October 8 will do so again. The same governments that recognized a Palestinian state while Hamas held hostages will again equate Israeli self-defense with aggression.
That is the reality Israel now faces. Its military achievements are real, but without a political structure to replace Hamas, they risk evaporating. A vacuum cannot exist in Gaza; something will fill it – either the international coalition envisioned by Trump or Hamas itself.
Israel’s options are limited. Its first priority must be ensuring continued American support. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit this week to the US Central Command-run coordination center in Kiryat Gat was part of that effort. Interestingly, even the more right-wing ministers in the government, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, have remained uncharacteristically quiet.
They seem to realize that it is wiser to let Hamas break the ceasefire than to collapse it themselves. If Israel is forced to resume the war, it must do so with legitimacy, not defiance.
However, legitimacy alone won’t solve the problem. If Hamas retains control on the ground, if a new governing entity never emerges, and if the ISF fails to deploy, Gaza will revert to exactly what it was before October 7 and emerge once again as a terror enclave posing a constant threat to Israel. Hamas will not disarm voluntarily, nor will it reform. Allowing it to reestablish control would be a historic mistake.
If Israel wants to truly win, it must insist on a real alternative in Gaza, one backed by regional partners and sustained by international legitimacy. Without it, Hamas’s ideology will endure, and Sinwar’s legacy will live on even from the grave.