Have All Abandoned Hamas?

The question of whether Hamas has been completely abandoned by its allies deserves a nuanced answer. While the militant-political organization is under unprecedented isolation and financial strain, it has not been left entirely friendless. What has changed is not the existence of support, but the depth and nature of it. The few remaining backers are more pragmatic and cautious than ideological.

Iran remains the most steadfast supporter of Hamas, but even Tehran’s approach has shifted from enthusiasm to calculation. The Islamic Republic continues to provide limited training, intelligence, and weapons through its network that includes Hezbollah and the IRGC. Yet, Hamas no longer occupies the central role it once did in Iran’s “Axis of Resistance.” Tehran’s strategic priority today is containing Israel through Hezbollah in Lebanon and maintaining deterrence in Syria and Iraq. In that equation, Hamas has become an auxiliary, not a frontline force.

Qatar, long seen as Hamas’s financial lifeline, has also recalibrated its policy. The unmonitored cash deliveries to Gaza that sustained Hamas’s governance structure are now being rerouted through the United Nations and humanitarian agencies. Doha seeks to retain its role as a mediator rather than an outright patron. That shift leaves Hamas with a smaller and more conditional stream of funds — insufficient to maintain administrative control in a war-torn enclave.

Turkey’s support, meanwhile, has settled into the realm of rhetoric. President Erdoğan continues to speak forcefully for Palestinian rights, but Ankara avoids concrete steps that could jeopardize its economic and diplomatic relations with the West. Turkey’s relationship with Hamas has become largely symbolic — a political shield rather than a material one.

Across the Arab world, the mood has changed dramatically. Egypt views Hamas as a destabilizing factor on its Sinai frontier; Jordan and the Gulf monarchies see it as a residue of the Muslim Brotherhood; and Saudi Arabia, pursuing strategic normalization with Israel, has little appetite for association. The UAE, a key Arab power, treats Hamas as a security threat rather than a liberation movement. This new regional consensus marks a profound isolation for the group.

Yet, Hamas is not entirely defeated. It continues to command thousands of fighters, retains limited weapons stockpiles, and still projects control over parts of Gaza. More importantly, popular sympathy for the Palestinian cause across the Muslim world remains deeply rooted. But sympathy does not translate into resources. Without substantial state sponsorship, Hamas is now sustained mainly by resilience, underground networks, and a sense of defiance rather than structured external support.

In essence, Hamas stands at a crossroads. Its godfathers have not fully abandoned it, but their backing has turned conditional and cautious. The movement survives, but in a diminished, more isolated form — powerful enough to persist, yet too constrained to dominate. The age of ideological patronage is ending; what remains is a movement fighting for relevance amid the ruins it once ruled.

 

Biden, Netanyahu on collision course

Relations between President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sank to a wartime low on Monday with the US allowing passage of a Gaza ceasefire resolution at the United Nations and drawing a sharp rebuke from the Israeli leader.

Netanyahu abruptly scrapped a visit to Washington this week by a senior delegation to discuss Israel’s threatened offensive in the southern Gaza city of Rafah after the US abstained in a Security Council vote that demanded an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and the release of all hostages held by the Palestinian militants.

The suspension of that meeting puts a major new obstacle in the way of efforts by the US, concerned about a deepening humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, to get Netanyahu to consider alternatives to a ground invasion of Rafah, the last relatively safe haven for Palestinian civilians.

The threat of such an offensive has increased tensions between longtime allies the United States and Israel, and raised questions about whether the US might restrict military aid if Netanyahu defies Biden and presses ahead anyway.

"This shows that trust between the Biden administration and Netanyahu may be breaking down," said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Republican and Democratic administrations. "If the crisis is not managed carefully, it’s only going to continue to worsen."

Biden’s decision to abstain at the UN, coming after months of mostly adhering to longtime US policy of shielding Israel at the world body, appeared to reflect growing US frustration with the Israeli leader.

The president, running for re-election in November, faces pressure not just from America's allies but from a growing number of fellow Democrats to rein in the Israeli military response.

Netanyahu confronts domestic challenges of his own, not least his far-right coalition members’ demands for a hard line against the Palestinians.

He also must convince hostages’ families he is doing everything for their release while facing frequent protests calling for his resignation.

As Netanyahu's office announced the cancellation of the visit, he said the failure of the US to veto the resolution was a clear retreat from its previous position and would hurt Israel's war efforts.

US officials said the Biden administration was perplexed by Israel's decision and considered it an overreaction, insisting there had been no change in policy.

Washington had mostly avoided the word ceasefire earlier in the nearly six-month-old war in the Gaza Strip and had used its veto power at the UN to shield Israel as it retaliated against Hamas.

But as famine looms in Gaza and amid growing global pressure for a truce in the war that Palestinian health authorities say has killed some 32,000 Palestinians, the US abstained on a call for a ceasefire for the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which ends in two weeks.

The challenge now for Biden and Netanyahu is to keep their differences from escalating out of control, analysts say.

Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank in Washington, said there was no reason this should be a mortal blow to relations. "So I don’t think the door is closed to anything," he said.

Signalling that the two governments remain in close communication, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, on a visit separate from the one Netanyahu's delegation scrubbed earlier, went ahead with high-level meetings in Washington on Monday.

But the US abstention adds to a deepening rift between Biden and Netanyahu, who have known each other for years but have had a testy relationship even in the best of times.

Earlier this month, Biden said in an MSNBC interview that a Rafah invasion would be a red line, though he added that the defense of Israel is critical and there is no way "I’m going to cut off all weapons so that they don’t have the Iron Dome (missile defense system) to protect them."

Netanyahu dismissed Biden's criticism and vowed to press forward in Rafah, the last part of the Gaza Strip where Israeli forces have not carried out a ground offensive, though US officials say there are no signs of an imminent operation.

That was followed last week with US Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the country’s highest-ranking Jewish elected official, describing Netanyahu as an obstacle to peace and calling for new elections in Israel to replace him.

Biden called it a "good speech."

But Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters on Wednesday he was thinking of inviting Netanyahu, who spoke by videolink to Republican senators last week, to address Congress. That would be seen as a jab at Biden, giving Netanyahu a high-profile forum to air grievances against the US administration.

Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse told Reuters that Netanyahu appeared to be working with Republicans to weaponize the US-Israel relationship in favor of the right wing.

Biden’s 2024 re-election bid limits his options: he needs to avoid giving Republicans an issue to seize on with pro-Israel voters, while also halting the erosion of support from progressive Democrats dismayed by his strong backing for Israel.

Netanyahu, aware that polls show him being soundly defeated in any election held now, knows there is wide support for continuing the war in Gaza among an Israeli population still deeply traumatized. He appears willing to risk testing Washington's tolerance.

All members of Netanyahu's emergency unity government support continuing the war until Hamas is destroyed and the hostages are returned, and there has been little sign of willingness to meet US calls for moderation, despite the growing risk of international isolation.

Hard-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said Israel was a partner but the United States was not its patron state.

Israeli ship attacked off coast of Oman

An Israeli-operated ship came under attack off the coast of Oman on Thursday night in the latest case of tit-for-tat retaliatory strikes between Israel and the Resistance Axis. 

The oil tanker, Mercer Street, which is managed by Israeli shipping magnate Eyal Ofer’s Zodiac Maritime, was traveling from Dar es Salaam in Tanzania to the United Arab Emirates port of Fujairah. The ship was attacked by what American sources say a drone in the north of the Sea of Oman.

The Israeli company said two crewmen, a British and Romanian national, died in the attack. “With profound sadness, we understand the incident onboard Mercer Street on 29 July, 2021 has resulted in the deaths of two crew members on board,” Zodiac Maritime said in a statement.

No country claimed responsibility for the attack but the Iranian news channel Al-Alam said the attack came in retaliation for an earlier Israeli strike against the al-Dhaba’a airport in the Syrian city of al-Qusayr which killed two men from the Resistance.

Citing informed sources in the Resistance, Al-Alam said the attack on Mercer Street was in response to the al-Dhaba’a strike. Although, no group has claimed responsibility for the attack, Al-Alam, citing Resistance sources, said the attack on the Israeli ship off the coast of Oman was carried out by resistance groups in response to the Tel Aviv attack on Syria's al-Dhaba’a airport.

“This announcement seems to have come to confirm in practice that the axis of resistance is greater than geography, and that the front of this axis is one front, as is the front of America, Israel and the Arab backwardness, headed by Saudi Arabia and the UAE, one front,” the Iranian broadcaster commented on its scoop. 

Reuters quoted Western intelligence sources as saying that the main suspect in the attack is Tehran, but the same sources stressed that governments are still seeking compelling evidence. The U.S. State Department expressed its alarm over the incident, and confirmed Washington's work with its international partners to find out the circumstances, and that it is closely monitoring the situation.

In Israel, there was no unified reaction to the attack. First, Israeli media sought to downplay the incident but as the story developed, they highlighted the Israeli allegations against Iran, though it did not claim responsibility for the attack.

An Israeli security official told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity that Israel believes Iran was behind the attack on the ship, citing similar attacks in the past.

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid put the blame on Iran for the incident. “Iran is not just an Israeli problem, but an exporter of terrorism, destruction and instability that harms us all. The world must not be silent in the face of Iranian terrorism that also harms freedom of shipping,” he claimed in a statement without providing any evidence to support his claim. 

Israeli news website Ynet said the assessment in Israel was that there were two attacks on the ship, spaced several hours apart. The first caused no damage, and the second hit the bridge, causing the casualties. It quoted an unnamed Israeli official as saying “Israel will find it hard to turn a blind eye to the attack,” according to Reuters.  

Another Israeli news website DEBKAfile which is known for its close ties with Israel’s intelligence community claimed that the Israeli vessel was attacked by an “Iranian kamikaze drone,” something that took place for the first time. All previous alleged cases of Iran’s attacks on Israeli vessels involved allegations that Iran used other means to mount an attack. 

DEBKAfile reported that what happened in the Sea of Oman marked the “first direct armed drone attack on an Israeli merchant vessel.”

According to the Israeli news website, Israel’s Defense Minister Benny Gantz called an urgent conference on Friday night with Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Aviv Kochavi and other senior commanders, following which Gantz announced that Israel would make an “appropriate response” to the attack.