Legal
Basis of Resistance
International law recognizes the legitimacy of armed
resistance against foreign occupation. United Nations General Assembly
Resolution 37/43 (1982) affirms the right of peoples “under colonial and
foreign domination and alien occupation to struggle … by all available means,
including armed struggle.”
The Palestinian case clearly falls within this framework.
Israel’s continued occupation of Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem
violates numerous UN resolutions, including UN Security Council Resolution 242
(1967) and 338 (1973), which demand Israeli withdrawal from occupied
territories.
Thus, the actions of Palestinian resistance groups—including
Hamas—are not “terrorism” in the legal sense but a manifestation of the
internationally recognized right to resist occupation.
Historical
Parallels
Resistance movements throughout history were often branded
“terrorist” by dominant powers. The French Resistance against Nazi Germany
engaged in armed attacks and sabotage but is now revered as heroic.
Nelson Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) was on US
and British terrorist watch lists until the 1990s.
Similarly, the FLN in Algeria and the Mau Mau in Kenya were
vilified as terrorists during their anti-colonial wars.
Today, they are celebrated as freedom fighters who
dismantled colonial rule. Hamas should be understood in this historical
continuum rather than through selective moral judgments.
Political
and Social Legitimacy
Hamas is not an isolated militant group. In the 2006
Palestinian legislative elections, declared free and fair by international
monitors, Hamas won a majority, underscoring its legitimacy among Palestinians.
Beyond its military dimension, it provides education,
healthcare, and welfare services in Gaza, functioning as both a political and
social actor.
This dual role strengthens its claim as a national
liberation movement rather than a mere armed faction.
Double
Standards
The Western narrative reveals glaring inconsistencies. When Ukraine
resists Russian occupation, it is celebrated as self-defense. When Palestinians
resist Israeli occupation, it is condemned as terrorism.
Such double standards highlight the politicization of the
term “terrorism,” stripping it of objective meaning and weaponizing it to
delegitimize legitimate struggles.
Palestinian
Struggle
It is important to emphasize that Hamas does not exist in
isolation but as part of a century-long Palestinian resistance to dispossession
and occupation.
The 1948 Nakba displaced hundreds of thousands of
Palestinians, and Israel’s subsequent expansion entrenched a system widely
described by human rights organizations—including Amnesty International and Human
Rights Watch—as apartheid. In this context, Hamas embodies continuity with the
larger Palestinian liberation struggle.
Hamas is not merely a militant group but a resistance
movement rooted in the Palestinian right to self-determination. International
law, historical precedent, and moral logic place it firmly within the tradition
of freedom fighters, not terrorists.
To criminalize Hamas is to criminalize the very notion of
liberation. Just as yesterday’s “terrorists” became today’s national heroes,
the Palestinian struggle—and Hamas as part of it—must be recognized as a fight
for justice and freedom.
