Unraveling the Betrayal: Why Gaza Views Hamas as a Symbol of Unprecedented Arab Abandonment

On the second anniversary of the significant October 7 Operation Al-Aqsa Storm, Hamas released a powerful statement that has reverberated through the region. This statement condemned what they termed as “shameful international silence and complicity, and unprecedented Arab abandonment.” This rhetoric is not mere political posturing; it reflects the lived reality of a society in Gaza that has endured relentless bombardment, starvation, and displacement.

The statement serves a dual purpose: it memorializes martyrs while simultaneously accusing regional leaders and global powers of sacrificing Palestinian dignity for the sake of stability and profitable deals while Gaza continues to suffer. The phrase “Arab abandonment” highlights a profound disconnect between historical expectations and current realities. For decades, Palestinians anticipated that Arab nations would convert public expressions of solidarity into tangible political support.

However, recent developments reveal a shifting landscape:

• Normalization Deals: Instead of supporting the Palestinian cause, many Arab nations have entered into normalization agreements with Israel, fostering large-scale trade partnerships and security alliances.
• Economic Cooperation: Economic ties between Israel and its Arab allies have evolved into practical cooperation, making punitive diplomatic actions costly for the involved states.
• Public Sentiment: Despite these political alignments, Arab Barometer polling indicates that public support for normalization has plummeted across the region, with widespread outrage persisting as governments act contrary to the will of their people.

This sense of abandonment is further illustrated through policy decisions. In July 2025, the Arab League suggested a postwar scenario where Hamas would disarm and be removed from Gaza’s governance. This declaration was met with criticism in Gaza, where it was seen as sidelining the very individuals whose fate was at stake.

Furthermore, several Arab governments have taken steps to suppress protests and solidarity actions that previously contributed to diplomatic pressure. Activists and civic organizations have reported increased detentions and restrictions on assembly.

In stark contrast, the high-profile Global Sumud Flotilla, primarily composed of European activists, attempted to deliver aid to Gaza, risking their safety to express solidarity. Despite being intercepted and blocked, this action arguably generated more global attention than the empty statements from Arab states.

The disparity between foreign activists and Arab governments is glaring:

• Foreign activists risked Israeli drone strikes and imprisonment to stand in solidarity with Gaza.
• Conversely, Arab governments repressed their own citizens, preventing them from protesting or sending humanitarian aid.

Looking at Yemen’s Ansarullah movement further illustrates this point. While Arab governments shared intelligence with the U.S. and Israel to facilitate strikes on Yemen, Ansarullah opened a new front in solidarity with Gaza. They targeted Israeli-linked shipping and launched missile and drone strikes on Israel, despite facing significant risks. Even amidst Israel’s escalating aggression towards Yemen, which resulted in civilian casualties and destruction of infrastructure, U.S. airstrikes under both Biden and Trump failed to diminish the group’s capabilities.

This paradox reveals that a besieged Yemeni movement under constant threat was more willing to act in support of Gaza than affluent Arab nations, whose leaders resorted to empty condemnations, normalization deals, and repression of their citizens’ protests.

These alignments have taken place alongside unwavering support from Washington, the primary ally of the Arab world, which continues to provide Israel with arms, intelligence, and diplomatic protection. The episode surrounding the so-called Trump peace plan further crystallized the political sidelining that Hamas has criticized. Senior figures within Hamas indicated that they were not consulted before the White House unveiled a proposal comprising 20 points; reports suggested that Israeli leaders influenced key aspects of the plan, effectively presenting Hamas with a deal they could either accept or reject under duress.

For Palestinians who value agency and have persisted in their resistance against colonialism and dispossession for nearly a century, the optics were clear: a plan with far-reaching implications for Gaza’s governance and the future of resistance was crafted without their input.

This is why the emphasis on “steadfastness” during the anniversary carries significant weight. As peaceful avenues, regional leverage, and political inclusion diminish, resistance—both political and social—fills the void. For Palestinians, this resistance is not merely a choice; it is an essential response to exclusion. The message emerging from October 7, reiterated two years later, is that the struggle continues not out of ease, but because all other options have been closed off.

This reality presents a challenge to the Arab world and the international community: the consequences of silence and abandonment are starkly evident in the ruins of Gaza—a graveyard for over 67,000 souls. Whether regional leaders choose to reclaim the Palestinian cause or continue to barter it away, Palestinians have made it abundantly clear that they will endure. They remain firmly rooted in their land, honoring their martyrs, and keeping their gaze fixed on Al-Aqsa.

As we mark two years since the Operation Al-Aqsa Storm, this unwavering resolve stands as the most genuine response to betrayal and serves as a poignant reminder that the story of Palestine is far from over.