International-News

Hamas claims the ‘fruits of 7 October’: controversy over Ghazi Hamad’s words

The Hamas leader describes the attack on Israel as the driving force behind the West’s recognition of the Palestinian state. An absurd narrative. Harsh reactions from Israel and the United States

Ghazi Hamad, a senior Hamas leader, sparked international controversy by declaring that the 7 October 2023 attack on Israel had produced “political fruits”, paving the way for growing recognition of the Palestinian state by several Western countries.

Interviewed by Al Jazeera, Hamad asked rhetorically: ‘Why do all countries now recognise a Palestinian state? Before 7 October, did any country ever dare to do so?‘ According to the Hamas leader, it was the attack that caused hundreds of Israeli civilian deaths that shook international consciences: ’The fruits of 7 October are what prompted the whole world to open its eyes to the Palestinian question,” he said.

The words, also reported by the Times of Israel, immediately provoked harsh reactions. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump condemned any opening towards the recognition of Palestine, because, as the words of the Hamas leader demonstrate, this action is ‘a gift to terrorists,’ accusing Hamas of using terror as a diplomatic tool.

Yet, over the past few months, France and the United Kingdom have indeed announced possible breakthroughs. French President Emmanuel Macron has indicated September as a key month for the recognition of Palestine, while British Prime Minister Keir Starmer has linked the same possibility to the end of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip.

However, attributing these political signals to the 7 October attack is a narrative that many analysts strongly reject. The new European openings are in fact often motivated by exasperation at the diplomatic impasse, the continuing deterioration of the humanitarian situation and the lack of political prospects for the Palestinians, rather than by the supposed effectiveness of Hamas’ violent strategy.

Ghazi Hamad’s statements therefore represent a cynical and controversial position, which risks undermining the legitimacy of any future negotiations. Linking the Palestinian cause – historically supported by large sections of the international community – to a massacre is politically damaging even before it is morally damaging.

The risk now is that this kind of rhetoric could strengthen the most intransigent positions, further hindering any attempt to relaunch a credible and peaceful negotiation process. With all due respect to the Palestinian population in the territories, who will continue to die amid military attacks and food shortages.

THE LATEST NEWS