# Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR41514

## Record

- **Collection:** Congressional research report
- **Document type:** CRS Report
- **Published:** December 2, 2010
- **Citation:** R41514

## Text

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress
(name redacted)
Analyst in Middle Eastern Affairs
December 2, 2010

Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R41514

CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Summary
This report and its appendixes provide background information on Hamas, or the Islamic
Resistance Movement, and U.S. policy towards it. It also includes information and analysis on (1)
the threats Hamas currently poses to U.S. interests, (2) how Hamas compares with other Middle
East terrorist groups, (3) Hamas’s ideology and policies (both generally and on discrete issues),
(4) its leadership and organization, and (5) its sources of assistance. Finally, the report raises and
discusses various legislative and oversight options related to foreign aid strategies, financial
sanctions, and regional and international political approaches. In evaluating these options,
Congress can assess how Hamas has emerged and adapted over time, and also scrutinize the track
record of U.S., Israeli, and international policy to counter Hamas.
Hamas is a Palestinian Islamist military and sociopolitical movement that grew out of the Muslim
Brotherhood. The United States, Israel, the European Union, and Canada consider Hamas a
terrorist organization because of (1) its violent resistance to what it deems Israeli occupation of
historic Palestine (constituting present-day Israel, West Bank, and Gaza Strip), and (2) its
rejection of the off-and-on peace process involving Israel and the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) since the early 1990s. Since Hamas’s inception in 1987, it has maintained its
primary base of political support and its military command in the Gaza Strip—a territory it has
controlled since June 2007—while also having a significant presence in the West Bank. The
movement’s political leadership is currently headquartered in exile in Damascus, Syria. Hamas
receives assistance and training from Iran, Syria, and the Lebanese Shiite militant group
Hezbollah. Hamas is often discussed alongside other groups in the region that engage in militant
and terrorist activities to achieve their ends, yet Hamas has confined its militancy to Israel and the
Palestinian territories—distinguishing it from the broader aspirations expressed by Al Qaeda and
its affiliates.
The overarching U.S. goal regarding Hamas is to deter, transform, marginalize, or neutralize it so
that it no longer presents a threat to Israel’s security, to a peaceful and lasting resolution of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or to other U.S. interests—either in its own right or as a proxy of Iran
or other actors. Various legislative and policy initiatives designed to accomplish this goal have at
most achieved temporary or partial success. It is possible to conclude that U.S. and other
international support for Israel and the Palestinian Authority/PLO dominated by Fatah (Hamas’s
main rival faction) has been counterproductive to some extent when comparing Hamas’s
domestic, regional, and international strength in the early 1990s—measured by factors such as
popularity, military force, and leverage with other actors (including Israel and Fatah)—to its
current strength. The Israeli-Egyptian closure regime in Gaza and various U.S. and international
initiatives constrain and isolate Hamas to a point and may exacerbate its internal organizational
tensions and tactical disagreements. Yet, the threats Hamas continues to pose to Israel, to
prospects for a two-state solution and to the future of Palestinian democracy present considerable
risks and difficult trade-offs for any U.S. policy decisions going forward.
The following CRS reports contain additional information on Hamas: CRS Report RL34074, The
Palestinians: Background and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted); CRS Report R40101,
Israel and
Hamas: Conflict in Gaza (2008-2009), coordinated by (name redacted); CRS Report R40092,
Israel
and the Palestinians: Prospects for a Two-State Solution, by (name redacted); CRS Report R40664,
U.S. Security Assistance to the Palestinian Authority, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RS22967,
U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Contents
Introduction: Issues for Congress ................................................................................................1
Overview ....................................................................................................................................3
Threats Hamas Poses ............................................................................................................4
Rockets and Smuggling Tunnels......................................................................................5
Gaza Militias and Security Forces ...................................................................................8
Comparison with Other Middle East Terrorist Groups ...........................................................9
Ideology and Policies .......................................................................................................... 12
Overall Goals................................................................................................................ 13
On Israel’s Existence and the Jews ................................................................................ 13
On a Two-State Solution ............................................................................................... 14
On the Use of Violence ................................................................................................. 15
On Its Model for an Islamic State .................................................................................. 15
Use of Media ................................................................................................................ 16
Leadership and Organization............................................................................................... 17
In General..................................................................................................................... 17
Internal Tensions? ......................................................................................................... 18
In Gaza ......................................................................................................................... 19
Popular Support ............................................................................................................ 21
Sources of Assistance.......................................................................................................... 22
Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah ............................................................................................. 22
Charities and Individuals............................................................................................... 23
Possible Options for Congress................................................................................................... 26
U.S. Aid to Palestinians....................................................................................................... 27
Aid to Strengthen Non-Hamas Groups and Individuals.................................................. 27
U.S. Security Assistance in the West Bank..................................................................... 29
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
(UNRWA) in Gaza ..................................................................................................... 30
Restrictions on Aid to Hamas or PA Government Including Hamas................................ 30
U.S. Assistance to Israel to Counter Rocket Threat .............................................................. 31
Countering Financial and Smuggling Networks................................................................... 31
Terrorist Designations and Legal Action........................................................................ 31
Sanctions on Iran and Syria ........................................................................................... 32
Anti-Smuggling Efforts in Egypt and Elsewhere ........................................................... 32
Countering Hamas Media.................................................................................................... 34
Addressing Hamas in a Regional Context............................................................................ 34
Oversight ............................................................................................................................ 35
Inclusion of Hamas in Negotiations? ............................................................................. 35
International Dimensions .............................................................................................. 37
Conclusion................................................................................................................................ 38

Figures
Figure 1. Map of Key Hamas Leadership Nodes..........................................................................2
Figure 2. Map of Approximate Rocket Ranges from Gaza ...........................................................7

Congressional Research Service

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Tables
Table 1. Hamas and Hezbollah: A Comparison .......................................................................... 10
Table 2. Public Budget Comparisons: Gaza and West Bank ....................................................... 20
Table 3. Major Hamas-commanded Security Forces in Gaza...................................................... 20
Table 4. U.S. Terrorist Designations and Financial Sanctions Against Hamas and
Affiliates................................................................................................................................ 23
Table D-1. Current Legislation Pertaining to Hamas .................................................................. 55
Table D-2. Selected Bills and Resolutions Pertaining to Hamas ................................................. 55

Appendixes
Appendix A. Historical Background and U.S. Policy ................................................................. 40
Appendix B. Key Dates in Hamas’s History .............................................................................. 48
Appendix C. Major Hamas Leaders........................................................................................... 51
Appendix D. Congressional Actions Pertaining to Hamas.......................................................... 55
Appendix E. Selected Bibliography on Hamas .......................................................................... 61

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 63
Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 63

Congressional Research Service

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Introduction: Issues for Congress
Hamas,1 or the Islamic Resistance Movement, is a Palestinian Islamist military and sociopolitical
movement that grew out of the Muslim Brotherhood, a Sunni religious and political organization
founded in Egypt in 1928 that has branches throughout the world. The United States, Israel, the
European Union, and Canada consider Hamas a terrorist organization because of (1) its violent
resistance to what it deems Israeli occupation of historic Palestine (constituting present-day
Israel, West Bank, and Gaza Strip), and (2) its rejection of the off-and-on peace process involving
Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) since the early 1990s. Hamas seeks
assistance and training from other Arab, Islamic, and international actors and organizations, and
receives it from Iran, Syria, and the Lebanese Shiite militant group Hezbollah (see “Iran, Syria,
and Hezbollah” below).2
The overarching U.S. goal regarding Hamas is to deter, transform, marginalize, or neutralize it so
that it no longer presents a threat to Israel’s security, to a peaceful and lasting resolution of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or to other U.S. interests—either in its own right or as a proxy of Iran
or other actors. Various legislative and policy initiatives designed to accomplish this goal have at
most achieved temporary or partial success. Hamas’s activities present challenges for U.S.
policymakers and members of Congress, including
•

countering Hamas’s military and terrorist threats to Israel, its financial and
smuggling networks, and its political influence;

•

determining under what circumstances and the manner in which the United States
might accept the participation of Hamas or Hamas representatives in a
Palestinian Authority (PA) government and/or in Israeli-Palestinian peace
negotiations;

•

de-linking Hamas from its connections with Iran and Syria; and

•

encouraging humanitarian relief efforts and economic development in Gaza
without bolstering Hamas.

U.S. efforts and policy debates on these issues, which include foreign aid strategies, financial
sanctions, and bilateral, regional, and international political approaches, are discussed further
below (see “Possible Options for Congress”).

1

Hamas is the transliterated acronym for the group’s Arabic name, “Harakat al Muqawama al Islamiyya,” or the
“Islamic Resistance Movement.” The acronym “Hamas” itself is an Arabic word meaning “zeal.”
2
See U.S. State Department, “Country Reports on Terrorism 2009,” Chapter 6. Terrorist Organizations, available at
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2009/140900.htm: “HAMAS receives some funding, weapons, and training from Iran.
In addition, fundraising takes place in the Persian Gulf countries, but the group also receives donations from Palestinian
expatriates around the world. Some fundraising and propaganda activity takes place in Western Europe and North
America. Syria provides safe haven for its leadership.” See also Anna Fitfield, “Hizbollah Confirms Broad Aid for
Hamas,” Financial Times, May 12, 2009.

Congressional Research Service

1

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Figure 1. Map of Key Hamas Leadership Nodes

Sources: Congressional Research Service; State of Israel, Ministry of Transport, Notice to Mariners, No. 1/2009
Blockade of Gaza Strip, January 2009; ESRI Community Data, 2008.
Notes: All boundaries and depictions are approximate. The designations employed and the presentation of
material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of CRS concerning the
legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its
frontiers of boundaries.

Congressional Research Service

2

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Overview
Since Hamas’s inception in 1987, it has maintained its primary base of political support and its
military command in the Gaza Strip—a territory it has controlled since June 2007—while also
having a significant presence in the West Bank. The movement’s political leadership is currently
headquartered in exile in Damascus, Syria.
Hamas’s military wing, the Izz al Din al Qassam Brigades, 3 has killed more than 400 Israelis,4
and at least 25 U.S. citizens (including some dual U.S.-Israeli citizens)5 in attacks since 1993. As
the Qassam Brigades developed from a small band of guerrillas into a more sophisticated
organization with access to greater resources and territorial control, its methods of attack evolved
from small-scale kidnappings and killings of Israeli military personnel to suicide bombings and
rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Hamas also has frequently attacked or repressed
Palestinian political and factional opponents, particularly in its struggle with Fatah and other
groups for control in the Gaza Strip since Israel’s military disengagement in 2005. For further
information on these points, see “Threats Hamas Poses,” Appendix A, and Appendix B below.
Hamas emerged as the main domestic opposition force to Palestinian nationalist leader Yasser
Arafat and his secular nationalist Fatah movement in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the 1980s
and 1990s—largely by using violence against Israeli civilian and military targets just as Arafat’s
PLO began negotiating with Israel. In 2006, a little more than a year after Arafat’s death and the
election of Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas to replace him as PA president, Hamas became—by most
analysts’ reckoning—the first Islamist group in the Arab world to gain power democratically after
a stunning electoral upset of Fatah gave it control of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC)
and of Palestinian Authority government ministries.6
Subsequent efforts by Israel, the United States, and the international community to neutralize or
marginalize Hamas by military, political, and economic means may have changed the outward
nature of its influence, but have failed to squelch it. In 2007, Hamas seized control of the Gaza
Strip through decisive armed victories over PA and Fatah forces loyal to Abbas (causing Abbas to
dismiss Hamas’s PA government in the West Bank and appoint a “caretaker” non-Hamas
government in its stead). Hamas has since consolidated its power in Gaza despite considerable
damage visited on Gaza’s people and infrastructure by an Israeli invasion in December 20083
Izz al Din al Qassam was a Muslim Brotherhood member, preacher, and leader of an anti-Zionist and anti-colonialist
resistance movement in historic Palestine during the British Mandate period. He was killed by British forces on
November 19, 1935.
4
Figures culled from Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website at http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+before+2000/
Suicide%20and%20Other%20Bombing%20Attacks%20in%20Israel%20Since and
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Victims+of+Palestinian+Violence+and+Terrorism+sinc.htm; and
from Jewish Virtual Library website at http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/TerrorAttacks.html. In
the aggregate, other Palestinian militant groups (such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Fatah-affiliated Al Aqsa
Martyrs’ Brigades, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) also have killed scores, if not hundreds, of
Israelis since 1993.
5
Figures culled from Jewish Virtual Library website at
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/usvictims.html.
6
Detailed descriptions of Palestinian organizations, governance organs, and political factions are contained in CRS
Report RL34074, The Palestinians: Background and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

3

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

January 2009 (also known as Operation Cast Lead, which was launched by Israel in response to
repeated rocket attacks by Hamas and other Palestinian militants) and despite ongoing restrictions
(often termed the “blockade” or “closure regime”) by Israel and Egypt on the flow of people and
goods into and out of the territory.
By consolidating its control over Gaza and pursuing popular support through resistance to Israel,
Hamas seeks to establish its indispensability to any Arab-Israeli political arrangement. Many
analysts believe that Hamas hopes to leverage this indispensability into sole or shared leadership
of the PA in both the West Bank and Gaza—either through a power-sharing arrangement with
Abbas and his Fatah movement, or through presidential and legislative elections (which were
supposed to take place in January 2010 under PA law, but have been postponed pending factional
agreement on conditions for holding them)—and to gain membership in or somehow supplant the
Fatah-dominated PLO, which remains internationally recognized as the legitimate representative
of the Palestinian people. Fatah’s political hegemony inside the occupied territories has been
undermined by the inability of the Fatah-dominated PLO to co-opt or incorporate Hamas, which
has proved more resistant than secular Palestinian factions to the PLO’s inducements. Egyptianmediated efforts to forge a PA power-sharing arrangement in the West Bank and Gaza between
Hamas and its traditionally dominant rival faction, the secular nationalist Fatah movement, have
stalled repeatedly.7
Hamas also has gained popularity among many Palestinians at Fatah’s expense because of its
reputation as a less corrupt provider of social services (funded by donations from Palestinians,
other Arabs, and international charitable front groups) and because of the image it cultivates of
unflinching resistance to Israeli occupation. Some Palestinians perceive that Hamas is more
rooted in the experiences and attitudes of West Bankers and Gazans than Fatah. Most leaders
from Fatah’s historic core, including current PA President/PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, spent
decades in exile with Yasser Arafat’s PLO in various Arab states. Although many from Hamas’s
top leadership, including political bureau chief Khaled Meshaal, also have lived in exile for 30plus years, Hamas has maintained a strong presence within the Palestinian territories since its
inception.
For additional information on Hamas’s historical background and on U.S. policy regarding
Hamas, see Appendix A.

Threats Hamas Poses
Many Israelis fear the potential long-term threat Hamas could pose to Israel’s physical and
psychological security if its rocket capabilities expand, if it gains an unchallenged foothold in the
West Bank, and/or if it otherwise finds a way to regularly target civilians inside Israel again.
Although damage from Palestinian suicide bombings in 1994-1997 and 2000-2008 is difficult to
measure qualitatively, the bombings constituted a fearsome means of attack. In the aggregate,
suicide bombing attacks by Palestinian militants killed approximately 700 Israelis (mostly
civilians within Israel proper),8 with Hamas directly responsible for more than 400 of these
7

The only previous power-sharing arrangement between Hamas and Fatah, the Saudi Arabia-brokered Mecca Accord
of February 2007, quickly deteriorated into factional fighting that led to Hamas’s takeover of Gaza in June 2007 (see
Appendix A and Appendix B).
8
Suicide bombing figures culled from Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website at http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/
Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+before+2000/
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

4

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

deaths. 9 Israel also fears that Iran, Syria, and possibly other actors in the region might use
Hamas’s proximity to Israel either to facilitate a coordinated multi-front military attack or to
mobilize regional and international political pressure against Israel through the precipitation of
crises and causes célèbres.10
The ability of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza to target civilians inside Israel (e.g.,
through suicide bombings) has been drastically reduced in the post-second intifada environment
through heightened Israeli security measures. A system of tightly patrolled barriers and crossings
limits access to Israel from both territories—in Gaza’s case, almost completely. The system also
includes the West Bank separation barrier11 that some Israelis envision as demarcating a border
between Israel and a future Palestinian state, even though it strays from the 1948-1967 armistice
line, known as the “Green Line,” in several places. Israeli military and intelligence operations
within the West Bank—including various obstacles to and restrictions on Palestinians’ freedom of
movement (some of which are designed to protect Israeli settlers and settlements)—buttress the
barrier system there.

Rockets and Smuggling Tunnels
In reaction to constraints on access to Israel, Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups in Gaza
have increased their strategic reliance on firing rockets and mortars indiscriminately at Israeli
targets.12 Rocket fire and the threat of future rocket fire with greater geographical range
precipitated Israel’s Operation Cast Lead against targets in Gaza in December 2008.13 The
approximately 8,350 rockets and mortars fired by Palestinians since 200114 have killed at least 28
Israelis and wounded dozens, 15 while the persistent threat of rocket fire has had a broader
negative psychological effect on Israelis living in targeted communities. 16
(...continued)
Suicide%20and%20Other%20Bombing%20Attacks%20in%20Israel%20Since.
9
See footnote 4.
10
Examples of international pressure on Israel are the various convoys and flotillas, including the so-called “Gaza
Freedom Flotilla” in May 2010, seeking to thwart the Israeli-Egyptian closure regime and to raise awareness of the
humanitarian and economic situation in Gaza. For more information, see CRS Report R41275, Israel’s Blockade of
Gaza, the Mavi Marmara Incident, and Its Aftermath, by (name redacted).
11
The barrier is referred to in different ways by different groups and individuals that are often reflective of various
political or national ideologies. Commonly used alternative names are the “security fence” (often used by Israeli
sources) and the “apartheid wall” (favored by Palestinians), although neither appellation describes the barrier’s physical
nature completely accurately. In some places, the barrier is mainly concrete; in others, mainly chain-link and/or wire.
12
Since 2001, Hamas and several other Palestinian terrorist groups based in the Gaza Strip have attacked communities
in southern and coastal areas of Israel with thousands of indiscriminately fired rockets and mortars. During the second
Palestinian intifada in 2001, Hamas militia members and others fired homemade mortars at Israeli settlements in the
Gaza Strip and launched the first locally produced “Qassam” rockets, named after the early-20th Century militant
leader Sheikh Izz al Din al Qassam. Teams of engineers, chemists, and machinists have improved the range and
payload of the Qassam series rockets over time, and Israeli military raids have targeted several individuals and facilities
associated with rocket research and production operations.
13
Over the years, rockets have expanded in range beyond relatively small Israeli communities near the Gaza border,
such as the town of Sderot (population est. 24,000), to the larger coastal cities of Ashqelon (population est.120,000)
and Ashdod (population est. 200,000) and to the Negev city of Beersheva (population est. 185,000). Mid-range Gradstyle rockets (thought to be smuggled into Gaza) that travel farther than Qassam rockets have been fired from Gaza by
Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (Al Quds series) and the Popular Resistance Committees (Nasser series).
14
Information provided by Israeli government to CRS, November 2010.
15
“Q&A: Gaza conflict,” BBC News, January 18, 2009, available at
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

5

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Since the end of Operation Cast Lead, Hamas has permitted far fewer rockets to be fired from
Gaza by its military wing and other Palestinian militant groups, perhaps because of a desire to
avoid another large-scale Israeli attack. Nevertheless, analysts and Israeli officials say that Hamas
continues to manufacture and stockpile hundreds, if not thousands, of “Qassam” rockets.17 These
rockets have limited ranges, and are generally made from household ingredients such as fertilizer,
sugar, alcohol, fuel oil, pipes, and scrap metal. The raw materials are generally smuggled into
Gaza—thus circumventing the Israeli-Egyptian closure regime—via tunnels under the Egyptian
border.
Since Israel’s disengagement from Gaza in 2005, Hamas has promoted a dramatic expansion of
the network of smuggling tunnels connecting Gaza with Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. Under the
closure regime aimed at undermining Hamas’s control over the territory, the tunneling network
has become Gaza’s primary economic engine and mode of rearmament for militants. In addition
to raw materials for Qassam rockets and other explosive devices, press and trade reports and
Israeli officials allege that thousands of mortars and hundreds of longer-range rockets in Hamas’s
arsenal18 (some of which may have been manufactured in Iran or China) have been smuggled into
Gaza through the tunnels. As of the summer of 2010, one report said that these longer-range
rockets could include dozens of 122-mm Grad or Grad-style rockets (sometimes known as
Katyushas) and 230-mm Oghabs, and possibly some 50 modified 240-mm Fajr-3 rockets that
could conceivably reach Tel Aviv or Israel’s nuclear facilities in the Negev Desert near Dimona.19
Hamas and other Palestinian militants also have reportedly received small arms and anti-aircraft
and anti-tank weapons through the tunnels.20

(...continued)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7818022.stm.
16
For a comprehensive treatment of this subject, see Human Rights Watch, Rockets from Gaza: Harm to Civilians from
Palestinian Armed Groups’ Rocket Attacks, August 6, 2009, available at
http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2009/08/06/rockets-gaza-0.
17
Information provided to CRS by Israeli government, November 2010.
18
Ibid.
19
Ian Siperco, “Shield of David: The Promise of Israeli National Missile Defense,” Middle East Policy, Vol. 17, Issue
2, Summer 2010.
20
See “Report: Egypt seizes anti-aircraft weapons bound for Gaza,” haaretz.com, September 7, 2010.

Congressional Research Service

6

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Figure 2. Map of Approximate Rocket Ranges from Gaza
(for rockets possibly possessed by Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups)

Sources: Congressional Research Service; Jane’s Missiles and Rockets; Ian Siperco, “Shield of David: The Promise
of Israeli National Missile Defense,” Middle East Policy, Vol. 17, Issue 2, Summer 2010.
Notes: All boundaries, distances, and other depictions are approximate. The designations employed and the
presentation of material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of CRS
concerning the presence in Gaza of the rockets described herein. There is no evidence that rockets with a range
farther than about 40 km have been fired at Israeli targets, though there have been reports that Hamas has
successfully tested longer-range rockets.

Congressional Research Service

7

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Estimates say that approximately 7,000 people work on over 1,000 tunnels. The tunnels are
reportedly of a generally high quality of engineering and construction—with some including
electricity, ventilation, intercoms, and a rail system. The openings to many tunnels are found
within buildings in or around Gaza’s southernmost city of Rafah. Although Israeli airstrikes
rendered over 100 tunnels inoperative during Operation Cast Lead, many of them were restored
within a few weeks because the main damage was sustained at the openings, not in the middle
sections.21 Israel, Egypt, the United States, and other North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
countries have pledged to stop or slow smuggling to Gaza by land and sea, and some measures
such as Egypt’s construction of an underground fence along its side of the Gaza-Egypt border
(see “Countering Financial and Smuggling Networks”) have been taken. Nevertheless, antismuggling capabilities remain limited and/or constrained.22
It also is possible that Hamas may have the capability to fire rockets from outside of Gaza. In
August 2010, rockets fired from Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula hit the neighboring cities of Eilat, Israel,
and Aqaba, Jordan, on the Red Sea coast. Israeli and Egyptian officials, along with Palestinian
Authority officials from the West Bank, claimed that Hamas was responsible. 23

Gaza Militias and Security Forces
The leadership and most of the manpower—estimated at about 2,500—of Hamas’s military wing,
the Qassam Brigades, are in Gaza.24 In addition, the Hamas-led government in Gaza maintains a
robust contingent of approximately 13,000-14,000 police, security, and intelligence personnel,
many of whom are drawn from the Executive Force that assisted the Qassam Brigades in
defeating Fatah-led forces in Gaza in June 2007 (see Table 3 and “In Gaza” below). 25
It seems unlikely that the Qassam Brigades and Hamas-commanded Gaza security forces, even
working in concert with other Gaza-based militants, could present a significant conventional
threat to an Israeli military superior in manpower, equipment, and technology. Perhaps the main
threat is the possibility that Hamas might kill or abduct additional Israeli soldiers to add to the
leverage it believes it has gained against Israel with current Hamas captive Sergeant Gilad
Shalit.26 The Qassam Brigades and other militant groups engage in periodic border skirmishes
21

Much of the information from this paragraph came from a CRS meeting with an Israeli official in August 2009. For a
description of past smuggling activities related to Gaza, see CRS Report R40849, Iran: Regional Perspectives and U.S.
Policy, coordinated by (name redacted).
22
See CRS Report RL33003, Egypt: Background and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RL34346,
The Egypt-Gaza Border and its Effect on Israeli-Egyptian Relations, by (name redacted).
23
“Netanyahu: Hamas responsible for rockets on Eilat; we will retaliate,” haaretz.com, August 4, 2010; Anshel Pfeffer
and Avi Issacharoff, “PA: Hamas military chief in Rafah ordered rocket attacks on Eilat, Aqaba,” haaretz.com, August
6, 2010.
24
Yezid Sayigh, “We serve the people”: Hamas policing in Gaza, Crown Paper, Crown Center for Middle East
Studies, Brandeis University, 2011 (forthcoming). This same source says that some of the security forces’ personnel
were holdovers from before the Hamas takeover. Some come from Fatah and other non-Hamas backgrounds.
25
Mohammed Najib, “Hamas creates external intelligence arm,” Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst, January 29, 2010.
26
Shalit, then a corporal, was taken captive in a June 2006 raid of an Israeli army post just outside Gaza. Two of
Shalit’s comrades were killed in the raid. The raid was organized jointly by the Popular Resistance Committees,
Hamas, and an extremist jihadist group calling itself the Army of Islam. Shalit has remained in Hamas’s custody since
then, and his status figures prominently in speculation about negotiations with Hamas associated with a possible
prisoner swap, cease-fire, or breakthrough in Palestinian power-sharing or Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. His wellbeing is a matter of major Israeli national concern.

Congressional Research Service

8

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

with Israeli forces involving small arms and improvised explosive devices, partly to continually
refresh their resistance credentials.
Hamas has portrayed its survival of Operation Cast Lead as a victory, but many analysts believe
that Israel established some level of deterrence. These analysts say that Hamas did not expect the
intensity of the Israeli operation and genuinely feared for the survival of its rule in Gaza. As a
result, they suggest the group is now more cautious about possible provocations of Israel. 27

Comparison with Other Middle East Terrorist Groups
Hamas is often discussed alongside other groups in the region that engage in militant and terrorist
activities to achieve their ends. Israeli officials routinely compare Hamas with Al Qaeda. Yet
Hamas has confined its militancy to Israel and the Palestinian territories—distinguishing it from
the broader violent jihadist28 aspirations expressed by Al Qaeda and its affiliates. This narrower
focus was reflected by the following statement from Hamas political bureau (or politburo) chief
Khaled Meshaal in a May 2010 interview with PBS’s Charlie Rose:
Hamas is a national resistance movement. Yet we adopt the Islamic intellectual approach
because we are part of the Muslim and Arab region. We have a battle only with the Israeli
occupation. We do not have any military act anywhere else in the world. We do not consider
any country in the world other than Israel as our enemy. We might say that the American
policies are wrong, but we do not have any conflict whatsoever except with the Israeli
politics. In other words, we do not practice resistance as an open choice anywhere else in the
world but in our occupied territories and against Israel. And we do not launch a religious
war. We are not against the Jews nor the Christians. And we do not pass any statements
about their religions. We only resist those who occupy our territories and attack us.29

Indeed, Al Qaeda voiced intense criticism of Hamas when it opted to engage in the Palestinian
political process in 2005-2007 because its leaders believed Hamas was fatally compromising Al
Qaeda’s ideal of pan-Islamic revolution. Al Qaeda’s number-two leader, Ayman al Zawahiri, said
in 2006 that “Those trying to liberate the land of Islam through elections based on secular
constitutions or on decisions to surrender Palestine to the Jews will not liberate a grain of sand of
Palestine.”30

27

Yoram Cohen and Jeffrey White, Hamas in Combat: The Military Performance of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance
Movement, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Policy Focus #97, October 2009, available at
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/pubPDFs/PolicyFocus97.pdf.
28
Jihadism is a concept with many different levels of meaning in Islam, from internal striving to external conflict
between Muslims and non-Muslims (or sometimes between Muslims and other Muslims deemed to be insufficiently
faithful). For more information, see CRS Report RS21695, The Islamic Traditions of Wahhabism and Salafiyya, by
(name redacted).
29
Transcript of remarks by Khaled Meshaal, “Charlie Rose,” PBS, May 28, 2010, available at
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11032#frame_top. For additional information both supporting and
countering Meshaal’s statement above on Hamas’s general stance toward Jews and Judaism, see “On Israel’s Existence
and the Jews” in the main body of the report.
30
Beverley Milton-Edwards and Stephen Farrell, Hamas: The Islamic Resistance Movement, Polity Press, Malden,
Massachusetts, 2010, p. 268. After Hamas agreed to a Saudi-brokered power-sharing arrangement with Fatah in
February 2007 known as the Mecca Accord, Zawahiri claimed that “The leadership of Hamas government has
committed an aggression against the rights of the Islamic nation by accepting what it called ... respecting international
agreements. I am sorry to have to offer the Islamic nation my condolences for the [virtual demise] of the Hamas
leadership as it has fallen in the quagmire of surrender.” “Hamas rejects al-Zawahiri’s claims,” aljazeera.net, March
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

9

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Furthermore, hundreds of disaffected Palestinians in Gaza who apparently share Al Qaeda’s
misgivings that Hamas engages in unacceptable compromise have joined violent jihadist groups
with Salafist31 leanings or postures in opposition to Hamas. Nevertheless, Hamas has been willing
to tolerate these smaller extremist groups to the extent they refrain from public challenges to
Hamas’s rule.32 Hamas also coordinates action with others that reject peace with Israel—both
Islamist and secular—under some circumstances.
Comparisons between Hamas and groups that blend political Islam with national or ethnic
loyalties and grievances may be more apt. Hezbollah shares many characteristics with Hamas. It
participates in electoral politics; it has a distinct geographical base of support; its main foreign
backing comes from Iran. Perhaps most importantly, opposition to Israeli occupation or alleged
occupation is a key animating factor for its supporters. Yet, significant differences exist between
the two organizations, many of them following from Hezbollah’s Shiite identity and greater
freedom to traverse national borders. Shiites (Hezbollah’s core demographic support base)
constitute a significantly lower percentage of the population in Lebanon than the percentage
Sunnis constitute in the Palestinian territories. Hezbollah’s ties with Shiite Iran also are closer and
more ideological than Hamas’s. Hezbollah operatives actively train other militants (including
from Hamas—see “Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah” below). Also, Hezbollah’s rockets, other weapons,
and militias are believed to present a significantly greater conventional military threat to Israel
than Hamas’s. 33
Table 1. Hamas and Hezbollah: A Comparison
Hamas

Hezbollah

1987

1982

National Identity

Palestinian

Lebanese

Sectarian Identity

Sunni Muslim

Shiite Muslim

Estimated Percentage of National
Population That Shares Sectarian
Identity

99%

28%-49%a

Named Foreign Terrorist
Organization by State Department

1997

1997

Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, private
individuals and organizations

Iran, Syria, private individuals and
organizations

Established

Major Sources of Assistance

(...continued)
12, 2007.
31
Salafism refers to a broad subset of Sunni revivalist movements that seek to purify contemporary Islamic religious
practices and societies by encouraging the application of practices and views associated with the earliest days of the
Islamic faith. The world’s Salafist movements hold a range of positions on political, social, and theological questions
and include both politically quietist and violent extremist groups. Salafists generally eschew accommodation of “unIslamic” political mechanisms such as Western-style democracy. For more information, see CRS Report RS21695, The
Islamic Traditions of Wahhabism and Salafiyya, by (name redacted).
32
Hamas took swift and brutal retributive action against the Army of Islam in September 2008 (in Gaza City) and Jund
Ansar Allah in August 2009 (in Rafah) when confronted with challenges to its authority. Nicolas Pelham and Max
Rodenbeck, “Which Way for Hamas?”, New York Review of Books, November 5, 2009, available at
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2009/nov/05/which-way-for-hamas/.
33
For more information on Hezbollah and the threats it potentially poses, see CRS Report R41446, Hezbollah:
Background and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

10

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Hamas

Hezbollah

Members of National Legislature

74 of 132b

10 of 128

Ministers in National Government

All ministers in de facto Gaza
government; no ministers in PA
government in West Bank

2 of 30 (Agriculture and
Administrative Reform); part of
“March 8” coalition that has 10
ministers total

Estimated Troop Strength

2,500 in Qassam Brigades
(military wing)
13,000-14,000 (some non-Hamas) in
Gaza security forces

A few hundred terrorist operatives
and potentially thousands more
volunteers for defensive operations

Approximate Maximum
Rocket/Missile Range

80 km

Over 100 km (and possibly over 200
km)

Territorial Control

Gaza Strip (using de facto control of
national institutions and mechanisms)

Areas of southern and eastern
Lebanon

Probable Main Weapon Supply
Route

Tunnels under patrolled and fenced
Gaza-Egypt border (14 km)

Loosely patrolled and unfenced
Lebanon-Syria border (260 km)

No evidence

Yes

Says noc

Yes

Trains Militants of Other
Nationalities
Has Intentionally Struck at U.S.
Targets in Middle East

Sources: CRS Report R41446, Hezbollah: Background and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and (name redact
ed); Central Intelligence Agency; State Department; Council on Foreign Relations; Yezid Sayigh;
International Foundation for Electoral Systems.
Notes: This comparison is not meant to be exhaustive.
a.

U.S. State Department, International Religious Freedom Report 2009, available at
http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2009/127352.htm; Pew Forum for Religion & Public Life, Mapping the Global
Muslim Population, October 2009, available at
http://pewforum.org/uploadedfiles/Orphan_Migrated_Content/Muslimpopulation.pdf. Because parity among
confessional groups in Lebanon remains a sensitive issue, a national census has not been conducted since
1932.

b.

Hamas won this legislative majority in 2006, but the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) has not been
functional since Hamas’s takeover of Gaza in June 2007 due to a lack of a quorum caused by the territorial
political divide between Gaza and the West Bank. Furthermore, the PLC’s four-year term expired in January
2010 under PA law, although the PLO Central Council extended its term in December 2009 (along with the
PA presidential term of Mahmoud Abbas, which also expired in January 2010 under PA law) until new
elections can be held. The legality of this extension has been questioned. For further information, see CRS
Report RL34074, The Palestinians: Background and U.S. Relations, by (name redacted).

c.

Hamas has not claimed responsibility for any attacks targeting Americans, and insists that it targets only
Israelis, but has killed at least 25 U.S. citizens (some of whom were dual U.S.-Israeli citizens) in attacks
aimed at Israelis.

Hamas retains its claim to an electoral mandate because the majority it won in the Palestinian
Legislative Council (PLC) in 2006 elections has not been displaced through subsequent elections
(some say mainly due to reluctance by both Hamas and Fatah to risk their respective spheres of
control in Gaza and the West Bank because of uncertainty regarding Palestinians’ political
preferences and factional advantages). As a result, many Hamas leaders, followers, and
sympathizers identify the movement with other Sunni-led, Islamist-influenced groups and parties
in the region that participate non-violently in their respective political arenas. These include
Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and non-militant branches and affiliates of
the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamas’s model of having a foot in both political and military realms

Congressional Research Service

11

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

serves as inspiration for other regional Islamist groups. This leads to concerns among regional
states and the broader international community that Islamist groups elsewhere that participate or
seek to participate non-violently in the political arena could turn to violence.

Ideology and Policies
Hamas combines Palestinian nationalism with Islamic fundamentalism, although opinions differ
about how these two driving forces interact in Hamas’s ideology and policies.34 Its leaders strive
to connect Hamas to the longer narrative of Palestinian national struggle—dating to the time of
the British Mandate—and to past leaders such as the anti-colonialist Izz al Din al Qassam (see
footnote 3), Mohammed Amin al Husseini (the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during the British
Mandate), and Abd al Qader al Husseini (a political and military leader who died in the 1948 war
with Israel).
Some analysts insist that Hamas’s actions show that it remains best defined by reference to its
1988 founding charter or “covenant,” which sets forth a particularly militant, uncompromising,
and anti-Semitic agenda.35 These observers maintain this view despite and perhaps because of
statements and documents issued over subsequent years by Hamas leaders purporting to redefine
the movement’s agenda or distance it from the charter, but failing formally to disavow it. 36
Other analysts see Hamas as a pragmatic, evolving movement.37 They argue that Hamas has
already moderated its positions by participating in 2006 elections for the Palestinian Legislative
Council, agreeing to short-term cease-fires with Israel through indirect negotiation, and
expressing willingness to enter into a long-term cease-fire (or hudna) with Israel. Also, these
observers say, Hamas signed the Mecca Accord in February 2007, pursuant to which it agreed to
share power with Fatah, “respect” previous agreements signed by the PLO, and allow the PLO to
negotiate with Israel and submit any agreement reached to the Palestinian people for their
approval. Finally, these observers liken Hamas to the PLO from earlier times. The PLO, also once
a terrorist group, altered some of its tenets in the late 1980s and early 1990s—agreeing to eschew
violence, enter into negotiations with Israel (under the “land-for-peace” rubric of U.N. Security
Council Resolutions 242 and 338), and recognize its right to exist.38
Still other analysts do not assume that Hamas remains committed to every word of its charter, but
maintain that a decisive majority of Hamas members are unwilling to deviate from core principles
34

See Matthew Levitt, “Political Hardball Within Hamas: Hardline Militants Calling Shots in Gaza,” Washington
Institute for Near East Policy, PolicyWatch #1450, January 6, 2009, available at
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC05.php?CID=2982. This article contends that debate is most contentious
within Hamas over which of these two driving forces to prioritize.
35
See, e.g., Michael Herzog, “Can Hamas Be Tamed?”, Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006; Charles Krauthammer,
“Moral Clarity in Gaza,” Washington Post, January 2, 2009.
36
Many of these documents written subsequent to the Hamas charter can be found in Azzam Tamimi, Hamas: A
History from Within, Olive Branch Press, Northampton, Massachusetts, 2007, Appendices. However, Fatah, whose
leaders populate the main leadership positions of the PA and the PLO (which have dealings with Israel and the West),
has not purged its 1960s charter of its clauses calling for the destruction of the Zionist state and its economic, political,
military, and cultural supports (even though the PLO has recognized Israel’s right to exist).
37
See Henry Siegman, “US Hamas policy blocks Middle East peace,” Norwegian Peacebuilding Centre, September
2010, available at http://www.usmep.us/usmep/wp-content/uploads/NorefReport_Siegman_Hamas-Israel_Sep10.pdf;
Michael Bröning, “Hamas 2.0,” foreignaffairs.com, August 5, 2009.
38
See footnote 131.

Congressional Research Service

12

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

of the movement—namely, its ability to resort to violence and its unwillingness to agree to a
permanent peace or territorial compromise with Israel. 39 These analysts readily say that Hamas is
not monolithic. Yet, they assert that in the instances in which Hamas conveys an impression of its
pragmatism or potential moderation, consensus exists among its various political and military
leadership bodies and councils that such actions are tactical, confined within the limits its core
principles allow, and only bind Hamas as long as circumstances favor a diplomatic approach over
a more confrontational one. Under this interpretation, statements from Hamas leaders hinting at
permanent compromise of its core principles would either be deceptive or represent a
marginalized view. For example, these analysts claim, Hamas’s stated willingness to contemplate
a long-term cease-fire in the event of the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank
(including East Jerusalem) and Gaza would allow Hamas to consolidate its position and await a
more propitious moment to assault Israeli targets.40

Overall Goals
Hamas’s primary goal is to achieve the “liberation” of all of historic Palestine (comprising
present-day Israel, West Bank, and Gaza Strip) for Palestinian Arabs in the name of Islam. There
is vigorous debate among analysts and perhaps within Hamas regarding the essential aspects of
this goal. Hamas’s charter is explicit about the struggle for Palestine being a religious obligation.
It describes the land as a waqf, or religious endowment, saying that no one can “abandon it or part
of it.”
Those who believe that Hamas is pragmatic are less likely to believe that it considers itself bound
by its charter or by rhetoric intended to rally domestic support. On the other hand, those who
contend that consensus exists within Hamas not to compromise on core principles believe that
Hamas sees events from a different perspective than U.S. and other international analysts. They
assert that Hamas has a much different concept of time, borne out by a gradual but consistent rise
in the movement’s fortunes over the course of generations (within its greater Muslim Brotherhood
context) in the face of significant internal challenges and external opposition.

On Israel’s Existence and the Jews
The 1988 charter commits Hamas to the destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic
state in all of historic Palestine. 41 It calls for the elimination of Israel and Jews from Islamic holy
land and portrays Jews in decidedly negative terms, citing anti-Semitic texts and conspiracies.
Many observers claim that subsequent statements from Hamas have refrained from or
deemphasized blanket negative references to Jews and supposed global Zionist conspiracies.
Some might say, however, that this is belied by numerous anti-Semitic statements and references

39

CRS interview in September 2010 with U.S. analyst covering Middle East terrorism at major Washington, DC think
tank.
40
See Matthew Levitt, “Score One for ‘Hamaswood,’” Middle East Strategy at Harvard, August 11, 2009, available at
http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/mesh/2009/08/score-one-for-hamaswood/.
41
For a translation of the 1988 Hamas charter (from the original Arabic), see
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp.

Congressional Research Service

13

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

to pejorative stereotypes in media controlled by Hamas, including programming for both children
and adults on Hamas’s Al Aqsa satellite television channel.42

On a Two-State Solution
Although Hamas’s charter is uncompromising in its call for the liberation of all of historic
Palestine, those observers who contend that Hamas is essentially pragmatic point to past
statements in which leaders pledged hypothetically to respect actions taken through a potential
Palestinian referendum or PA power-sharing government (that includes Hamas) to accept a twostate solution. 43 Hamas politburo chief Khaled Meshaal, however, in an August 2010 interview,
said:
Hamas does accept a Palestinian state on the lines of 1967—and does not accept the twostate solution. There is [a] big difference between these two. I am a Palestinian. I am a
Palestinian leader. I am concerned with accomplishing what the Palestinian people are
looking for—which is to get rid of the occupation, attain liberation and freedom, and
establish the Palestinian state on the lines of 1967. Talking about Israel is not relevant to
me—I am not concerned about it. It is an occupying state, and I am the victim. I am the
victim of the occupation; I am not concerned with giving legitimacy to this occupying
country. The international community can deal with this (Israeli) state; I am concerned with
the Palestinian people. I am as a Palestinian concerned with establishing the Palestinian state
only.44

In a May 2010 interview with PBS’s Charlie Rose, Meshaal clarified the circumstances under
which Hamas would respect the outcome of a Palestinian referendum on the relationship with
Israel held after, not before or concurrently with, the establishment of a Palestinian state:
If Israel withdraws to the borders of 1967, and from East Jerusalem, that will become the
capital of the Palestinian state with the right of self—with the right of return for the refugees
and with a Palestinian state with real sovereignty on the land and on the borders and on the
checkpoints. Then we—the Palestinian state will decide the future of the relationship with
Israel. And we will respect the decision that will reflect the viewpoint of the majority of the
Palestinian people…. Don’t request the Palestinian people to have a certain stance from
Israel while living under the Israeli occupation. Give the Palestinian people the opportunity
to live in a normal situation in a Palestinian state, and then the Palestinian people with
complete freedom will decide.45

42

Matthew Levitt, “Hamas’s Ideological Crisis,” Current Trends in Islamist Ideology Vol. 9, Hudson Institute Center of
Islam, Democracy, and the Future of the Muslim World, November 6, 2009, available at
http://www.currenttrends.org/research/detail/hamass-ideological-crisis.
43
Steven Erlanger, “Academics View Differences Within Hamas,” New York Times, January 29, 2006.
44
Sharmine Narwani, “Khaled Meshaal Interview: Hamas Chief Weighs In on Eve of Peace Talks,” The Huffington
Post, August 31, 2010.
45
Transcript of remarks by Khaled Meshaal, “Charlie Rose,” op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

14

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

On the Use of Violence
Hamas’s 1988 charter says, “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through
Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain
endeavors.”46
In the years since, the movement’s willingness to halt violence and emphasize political over
military methods in some circumstances, most notably the decision to participate in the 2006 PLC
elections, has prompted some analysts to express hope that it might contemplate demilitarizing.
Nevertheless, Hamas’s leadership and many other analysts insist that no matter what other means
Hamas may tactically employ from time to time, armed resistance remains its ultimate trump
card.
In a July 2010 interview with the Jordanian newspaper Al Sabeel, Meshaal discussed how having
the option to use violence enhances Hamas’s ability to negotiate, in contrast to the lack of
leverage he said the PLO has had since renouncing violence:
The [PLO] negotiators say: “Negotiation is the option, the course and the only plan.” They
coordinate security with the enemy and implement the “Road Map” and its security
requirements freely, with Israel offering nothing in return. What is there to force Olmert or
Netanyahu to grant the Palestinians anything?
Negotiation in the [PLO] case is out of its objective context; it is, merely from the
perspective of political logic, lacking resistance and not based on the necessary power
balance. The Vietnamese—for instance—negotiated with the Americans as the latter were
retreating; thus negotiations were useful for turning the last page on American occupation
and aggression. You are successful in negotiation and in imposing your conditions on the
enemy depending on the number of power cards you have on the ground.47

On Its Model for an Islamic State
Hamas’s charter envisions that Palestine will become an Islamic society that allows for
coexistence of all religions “under its wing”:
The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose
allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah
over every inch of Palestine, for under the wing of Islam followers of all religions can
coexist in security and safety where their lives, possessions and rights are concerned. In the
absence of Islam, strife will be rife, oppression spreads, evil prevails and schisms and wars
will break out.48

However, by reshaping PA institutions, laws, and norms to fit its ends—instead of fully
overhauling them—and by allowing the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in
the Near East (UNRWA) and other international and non-governmental organizations to operate

46

1988 Hamas charter, op. cit.

47

Translation (from the original Arabic) of Al Sabeel (Jordan) newspaper interview with Khaled Meshaal, available at
http://www.middleeastmonitor.org.uk/articles/middle-east/1491-khaled-meshal-lays-out-new-hamas-policy-direction.
48
1988 Hamas charter, op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

15

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

in Gaza, Hamas has opted—for the time being at least—for stability over a comprehensive
societal transformation. Hamas interior minister Fathi Hamad has insisted:
Claims that we are trying to establish an Islamic state are false. Hamas is not the Taliban. It
is not al-Qaeda. It is an enlightened, moderate Islamic movement.49

Some ideologues who believed that Hamas would or should have implemented sharia law and
formally and fully Islamized public and private life soon after taking power have been
disappointed. This disappointment has resulted in some Islamists joining more extremist groups,
though it does not appear to present a near-term challenge to Hamas’s rule and it is unclear how
pronounced or significant this trend will be long term.
Yet, there has been some movement toward a greater Islamization of society through the broader
Hamas community network of mosques, reconciliation committees, government ministries and
courts, security forces, religious scholars, and schools. Islamic fatwas (legal opinions) have been
offered as an alternative to secular justice for some police detainees. “Morality police,” judges,
and school principals advocate for and enforce Islamic dress codes—especially for women—in
publicly conspicuous places, although resistance to these measures has slowed or reversed their
implementation in some instances.50 How this has affected the minority of Palestinian Christians
in Gaza is unclear. In February 2010, interior minister Fathi Hamad (in a statement that some
could interpret as contradicting his above-quoted statement regarding Hamas’s supposed
moderation) “called for ‘Da’wa efforts to reach all institutions, not just mosques,’ signaling an
intent to systematically Islamize government agencies, starting with his own.”51

Use of Media
Hamas has used its control over Gaza’s media and a robust Internet presence52 to cast Islamist,
anti-Israel, and anti-Semitic teachings within a narrative portraying “martyrdom” and violence
against Israel and Jews as heroic. Public dissent is suppressed, and Hamas uses its Al Aqsa
television and radio channels and summer camps53 to indoctrinate children and youth with its
hybrid Islamist/Palestinian nationalist views. In 2009, Hamas even produced its first featurelength film celebrating the life and death of a Qassam Brigades militant from the first intifada.54 It
49

Pelham and Rodenbeck, op. cit..
Ibid.
51
Yezid Sayigh, “Hamas Rule in Gaza: Three Years On,” Crown Center of Middle East Studies, Brandeis University,
March 2010, available at http://www.brandeis.edu/crown/publications/meb/MEB41.pdf.
52
Sayigh, “We serve the people”…, op. cit. For example, the Qassam Brigades (www.qassam.ps) and Al Aqsa TV
(www.aqsatv.ps/ar/) maintain their own websites, and most (if not all) of the Hamas-run Gaza ministries, including the
Ministry of Interior (http://www.moi.gov.ps), also maintain websites. Some of these websites have English and other
foreign-language versions as well as Arabic.
53
In May and June 2010, two separate incidents of arson were reported against Gaza summer camps run by UNRWA
(that served approximately 250,000 Gaza youth in Summer 2010). Some analysts in Israel and the West believe that the
incidents may have taken place with the tacit or express approval of Hamas in an attempt to promote its model for
influencing youth over UNRWA’s (Hamas’s camps reportedly served approximately 100,000 Gaza youth in Summer
2010), given the criticism Hamas has reportedly leveled at the UNRWA camps for their focus on entertainment and
potentially “corrupting” influences. See “This year Hamas’ summer camps in the Gaza Strip…,” Meir Amit
Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, September 14, 2010, available at http://www.terrorisminfo.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/hamas_e128.htm; Sarah A. Topol, “Hamas’s Summer Camp War,”
Slate.com, July 27, 2010.
54
Levitt, “Hamas’s Ideological Crisis,” op. cit.
50

Congressional Research Service

16

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

encourages support and often recruits from “mosque youth” who assist neighborhood imams and
sometimes act as informants for Hamas-controlled Gaza intelligence organizations. 55
Hamas leaders also skillfully use regional and international media outlets to craft messages to its
various audiences, including Arabs and Muslims, Americans, Europeans, and Israelis. Israeli
officials insist that Hamas delivers the same message to Arab and Western audiences with a
different tone and emphasis for each, 56 creating what some might call purposeful and convenient
ambiguity over questions such as Hamas’s possible pragmatism.

Leadership and Organization
In General
Hamas has a variety of movement-wide and regional leadership organs, along with branches that
conduct its political, military, and social welfare activities with varying levels of formal
association to the group. In addition, the de facto Hamas government in Gaza has its own
leadership structures and public stature. Who controls overall strategy, policy, and financial
decisions, and how control is exercised, remain open questions with opaque answers. The State
Department and some analysts believe that Hamas generally follows a hierarchical model in
which ultimate control resides with the 15-member political bureau (or politburo) and the
movement-wide consultative council (known as the shura council) headquartered in Damascus.57
According to Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, “Under this Shura
council are committees responsible for supervising a wide array of activities, from media
relations to military operations. At the grassroots level in the West Bank and Gaza, local Shura
committees answer to the overarching Shura council and carry out its decisions on the ground.”58
One reason to believe that substantial authority resides with the movement-wide and regional
shura councils is that Hamas closely guards the secrecy of these councils’ membership. Hamas
also maintains branch offices in areas where it enjoys support, such as Lebanon, Sudan, the Gulf,
and possibly Iran.59
Some analysts, however, believe that Hamas’s formal hierarchical structures remain subject to a
dispersion of control given that the geographical division of the organization’s core activities
among Damascus and Gaza—maintained out of necessity for the organization’s security and
survival—creates a system of mutual leverage. This system is based on how the actions and
funding streams of Hamas’s political, military, and social welfare branches affect their
interactions, as these interactions both shape and are shaped by events.
Hamas seeks to mitigate the tension inherent between its activities as (1) a militant organization
uncompromisingly opposed to Israel in defiance of international opprobrium and
countermeasures; and (2) the de facto government in Gaza accountable to its people for managing
55

Sayigh, “We serve the people”…, op. cit.

56

Israel Defense Forces Intelligence, “The forked tongue of Hamas: How it speaks differently to Western and Arab
media,” April 11, 2006, available at http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism+Obstacle+to+Peace/Terror+Groups/The%20forked%20tongue%20of%20Hamas%2011-Apr-2006
57
See U.S. State Department, “Country Reports on Terrorism 2009,” Chapter 6, op. cit.
58
Levitt, “Political Hardball Within Hamas…,” op. cit.
59
See Cohen and White, op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

17

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

security, economic, and other basic societal issues that largely depend upon Israeli and
international actions. Some might express this as Hamas’s desire to maximize its power while
minimizing its accountability. Hamas claims it draws a bright line bifurcating the organization’s
leadership from its members in the Gaza government, which, if true, helps it deflect
accountability. This could discourage the United States and other international actors from
including Hamas in political discussions tied to Palestinian governance or negotiations with
Israel.

Internal Tensions?
Various U.S. and international policymakers, including Secretary of State Hillary Rodham
Clinton, have said or implied that organizational fissures may exist within Hamas.60 These
possible fissures are somewhat overlapping. One supposedly runs between Gaza-based leaders
accountable to local public opinion and Damascus-based leaders seen as closer to Iran. Another
supposedly runs between so-called pragmatists and more hardline elements in the Gaza leadership
(often Qassam Brigades militants and their sympathizers). Yet another is said to exist between
two groups of Damascus exiles: (1) native Gazans with personal links to Hamas’s Gaza founders
(such as Musa Abu Marzouk), and (2) displaced West Bankers used to operating outside of the
Palestinian territories who forged links with the Gaza founders mostly through Islamist
organizations in Kuwait (known as Kuwaitiyya, this group includes Khaled Meshaal).
Within the Qassam Brigades, some analysts speculate that internal struggles may partly explain
the rise of Jaljalat (an Arabic word for “thunder”), an “amorphous network of armed militants
numbering some 2,500-3,000” that reportedly includes many disaffected Brigades members.
Yezid Sayigh of King’s College London, a longtime analyst of Palestinian security and politics
and a former PLO advisor, claimed in a March 2010 report that Jaljalat fears that, “by taking on
the mundane tasks of government and public service delivery, Hamas has jeopardized its
nationalist and Islamic purity and its commitment to armed resistance against Israel.” Sayigh’s
report also said that Jaljalat is suspected of several attacks on Hamas vehicles and security
offices, as well as on Internet cafés. Additionally, the report said that Qassam Brigades
commander Ahmed al Jaabari may be concerned that some Hamas leaders in Gaza may be
building alternative power bases that could threaten the internal unity of Hamas and the
Brigades.61
Hamas could be more united than it seems, although it benefits from the portrayal of its
leadership as divided because this perception provides Hamas with greater flexibility in dealing
with both Western actors who hold out hope of its moderation and its Syrian and Iranian
benefactors who are reminded not to take its rejectionist stance for granted. Presenting a divided
front also may serve Hamas by providing it with a rationale to explain policy inconsistencies or
changes of direction to the Palestinian people.

60
In testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs,
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said, “In fact, we think there is [sic] some divisions between the Hamas
leadership in Gaza and in Damascus. There’s no doubt that those in Damascus take orders directly from Tehran.”
Transcript of Subcommittee hearing: “Supplemental Request,” April 23, 2009.
61
The source for this paragraph is Sayigh, “Hamas Rule in Gaza: Three Years On,” op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

18

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

In Gaza
Hamas directs the Gaza government and security forces through a self-appointed cabinet of
Hamas ministers led by Ismail Haniyeh, who served as PA prime minister prior to Hamas’s
dismissal from government after the June 2007 Gaza takeover. The process by which decisions
are taken is opaque, but analysts believe that it involves the movement-wide and Gaza regional
shura councils, the Damascus politburo, and Qassam Brigades leadership. 62 Along with an
unknown amount it may receive from Hamas’s organization and external benefactors, the Hamasled government may receive revenue from Gaza’s zakat committees (which collect Muslims’
obligatory donations of 2.5% of their surplus wealth) and from licensing fees and taxes. Although
Hamas is believed to make tens of millions of dollars annually from operating Gaza’s smuggling
tunnels (the estimate for 2009, according to Yezid Sayigh, was $150 million-$200 million), most
of its profit reportedly goes to the organization (the Qassam Brigades, in particular), and not the
Gaza regime. 63 The people of Gaza still rely on Israel, Egypt, the PA in the West Bank, UNRWA,
and other international and non-governmental organizations for access to and resources from the
outside world (including banking, water, and fuel for electricity).
Reference to the government in Gaza as the “Hamas regime” does not mean that all or even most
of the people employed in ministries, civil service positions, and even security forces are
necessarily members of Hamas or even Hamas sympathizers. Hamas partisans are, however,
intermingled throughout. The Jerusalem Report, an Israeli weekly, states that since the June 2007
takeover, the PA in the West Bank has continued paying salaries to tens of thousands of public
sector employees in Gaza—mostly in education- and health-related positions—while paying
salaries to thousands more (including from the security forces) on the condition that they not
perform their duties.64 Although this policy might allow the PA to maintain the loyalties of its
workers, it also has relieved the regime of the economic burden of supporting those paid by the
PA. It also has given the regime the opportunity to create a critical mass of Hamas loyalists within
the government by filling vacated positions in the security forces and other key public
institutions. Additionally, the Hamas-led regime has created its own ad hoc judicial framework
and hired its own judges,65 many of them from sharia courts.66

62

In a conversation with CRS in August 2009, an Israeli official claimed that the Damascus politburo, headed by
Khaled Meshaal, exercises more strategic control over Hamas’s activities than Hamas’s other leadership organs
because (the Israeli official claimed) the politburo is responsible for arranging the transport of cash, weapons, and other
supplies to the Gaza Strip.
63
CRS correspondence with Yezid Sayigh, October 2010.
64
Danny Rubenstein, “Planet Gaza,” The Jerusalem Report, June 7, 2010. U.S. appropriations legislation (including the
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-117)) prohibits U.S. aid to be “obligated for salaries of personnel of
the Palestinian Authority located in Gaza.” The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) says that direct
U.S. budgetary assistance to the PA is used “to service debt to commercial suppliers and commercial banks.” USAID
FY2011 Congressional Notification #1, October 7, 2010.
65
Nathan J. Brown, “Palestine: The Schism Deepens,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, August 20, 2009,
available at http://carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=23668
66
Sayigh, “Hamas Rule in Gaza: Three Years On,” op. cit. Sharia courts seek the direct application of Islamic legal
principles to society without reference to secular legal principles as possible supplements or alternatives.

Congressional Research Service

19

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Table 2. Public Budget Comparisons: Gaza and West Bank
Gaza
Hamas-led Regime

West Bank
Palestinian Authority

1.55 million

2.51 million

32,000

145,000

Overall Annual Budget Estimates
(2010)

$320 million-$540 milliona

$2.78 billion

Annual Internal Revenue (2010)

$60 million

$1.54 billion

External Support Requirements
(2010)

$260 million-$480 million

$1.24 billion

Palestinian Population in Territory
Public Employees

Sources: Central Intelligence Agency, State Department, Yezid Sayigh.
Notes: All figures are as of March 2010 and are approximate.
a.

The Hamas-led regime in Gaza states that its 2010 budget is $540 million, but it is possible that the actual
budget is closer to the actual budget for 2009, which was $320 million. CRS correspondence with Yezid
Sayigh, October 2010.

Although much international attention has focused on the improved professionalization of PA
security forces in the West Bank, analysts say that Hamas-led security forces in Gaza also exhibit
impressive levels of discipline and efficiency that have succeeded in keeping order. There are,
however, widespread reports of mistreatment and torture of Hamas political opponents
(particularly Fatah members) and other prisoners; at the same time, similar reports circulate about
PA treatment of Hamas members and sympathizers in the West Bank. 67
Table 3. Major Hamas-commanded Security Forces in Gaza
Branch

Role

Estimated Manpower

Internal Security Service

Counterintelligence and infiltration of
rivals (possibly including external
intelligence arm)

500

VIP Protection Force

Bodyguards for Hamas leadership and
key facilities

2,000

National Security Force

Border guard with early warning
function

930

Police

Routine civil and criminal policing
functions (largely derived from former
“Executive Force”)

10,000

Source: Mohammed Najib, “Hamas creates external intelligence arm,” Jane’s Islamic Affairs Analyst, January 29,
2010.

Many analysts believe that Hamas rule remains stable and effective in some areas despite the
miserable post-Operation Cast Lead situation and Gaza’s dilapidated infrastructure.68 Some see
the beginnings of a patronage system, citing, among other evidence, the $60 million in handouts
67

See, e.g., Human Rights Watch, Internal Fight: Palestinian Abuses in Gaza and the West Bank, July 29, 2008,
available at http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/07/29/internal-fight-0.
68
See, e.g., Daniel Byman, “How to Handle Hamas,” Foreign Affairs, September/October 2010; Thanassis Cambanis,
“Letter from Gaza,” foreignaffairs.com, June 18, 2010.

Congressional Research Service

20

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Hamas is reported to have distributed in $1,500-$6,000 increments to families whose homes were
lost or damaged in the conflict.69 According to Yezid Sayigh, Hamas benefits from “unbroken
territorial control over the entirety of the Gaza Strip.” This stands in contrast to the difficulties
faced by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, whose jurisdiction and operations are
“fundamentally circumscribed by the ‘Swiss cheese’ model of intermeshed Palestinian autonomy
areas and Israeli-controlled settlements and military zones.”70

Popular Support
Although Hamas’s rule in Gaza is authoritarian, it did win PLC elections in 2006, and some
believe that the future possibility of elections makes it responsive to public opinion. Polls taken in
the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza Strip from August-October 2010 indicated
that Palestinians favored Fatah over Hamas by nearly two-to-one to over three-to-one margins in
each territory.71 Large groupings of Palestinians (ranging in the various polls from 15% to nearly
40%), however, did not identify a factional preference,72 possibly indicating popular malaise or
cynicism regarding political developments and processes, or potential for volatility.
However, according to a September-October 2010 poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and
Survey Research, over 60% of Gazans (contrasted with just over 40% of West Bankers) supported
both Hamas’s August-September 2010 shooting attacks on Israeli settlers in the West Bank73 and
the idea of attacking civilians inside Israel.74 Might the possible resumption by Hamas of regular
attacks or other active opposition to Israeli-PLO negotiations gain it support from this
demographic? In the same poll, Palestinians were almost evenly divided (those agreeing came out
slightly ahead, by a 49%-48% margin) on the following question related to a possible two-state
solution:
There is a proposal that after the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and the
settlement of all issues in dispute, including the refugees and Jerusalem issues, there will be
a mutual recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the state of
the Palestinians people. Do you agree or disagree to this proposal?75

69
“Country Report: Palestinian Territories,” Economist Intelligence Unit, October 2009. Yet, some observers note that
Hamas leaders have mostly avoided the type of conspicuous consumption in which many Fatah leaders have engaged
since the 1990s, and which feeds widespread perceptions of corruption.
70
Sayigh, “Hamas Rule in Gaza: Three Years On,” op. cit.
71
Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No. 37 (September 30-October 2,
2010), available at http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2010/p37e.html#table; Arab World for Research and
Development, “Middle East Peace Process: Silver Linings Remain,” August 8-14, 2010, available at
http://www.awrad.org/pdfs/Oversample%20Results%20-%20Analysis%20%28final%29.pdf; Jerusalem Media and
Communications Centre, Poll No. 71 (September 11-15, 2010), available at
http://www.jmcc.org/documentsandmaps.aspx?id=808.
72
Ibid.
73
The shooting attacks, which coincided with the relaunch of Israel-PLO negotiations, killed four Israelis (including a
pregnant mother) and injured two more.
74
Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No. 37 (September 30-October 2,
2010), op. cit.
75
Ibid.

Congressional Research Service

21

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Some reports indicate that Hamas is building its support base among Palestinian refugees outside
of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, particularly in Lebanon.76 Gaining the loyalty of refugee camp
populations could give Hamas additional leverage with Fatah, Israel, and other regional actors.

Sources of Assistance
Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah
According to the State Department, Iran provides financial and military assistance to Hamas and
other Palestinian militant groups.77 During a December 2009 visit to Tehran, Hamas politburo
chief Khaled Meshaal said, “Other Arab and Islamic states also support us ... but the Iranian
backing is in the lead, and therefore we highly appreciate and thank Iran for this.”78 Meshaal and
his politburo colleagues, along with Hamas’s movement-wide shura council, have safe haven in
Damascus, Syria. From Damascus, Hamas’s leadership-in-exile can direct the group’s operations
through financial transactions and unrestrained access to travel and communications. The Iranbacked Hezbollah movement in Lebanon provides military training as well as financial and moral
support and has acted in some ways as a mentor or role model for Hamas,79 which has sought to
emulate the Lebanese group’s political and media success. Some Palestinians who are skeptical of
the Arab-Israeli peace process believe that Iranian support for Palestinian militants and Hezbollah
provides needed leverage with Israel that the United States and Europe are unlikely to deliver to
PA President/PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.
Some reports say that contributions to Hamas’s political and military wings from Iran range from
$20 million-$30 million annually.80 Yet, even though Hamas welcomes direct and indirect Iranian
assistance and Iran’s reputation among Arab populations has arguably been bolstered in recent
years by its anti-Western and anti-Israel positions and rhetoric, Hamas and Iran may intentionally
maintain a measure of distance from one another. An alternate interpretation is that they merely
understate the extent of their ties.81 They appear to understand the importance of Hamas
maintaining an image among its domestic constituents as an authentic Palestinian offshoot of the
Muslim Brotherhood, instead of as an Iranian proxy—owing to the ethnic, sectarian, and

76
See U.S. State Department, “Country Reports on Terrorism 2009,” Chapter 6, op. cit.; International Crisis Group,
Nurturing Instability: Lebanon’s Palestinian Refugee Camps, Middle East Report No. 84, February 19, 2009, available
at
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/Middle%20East%20North%20Africa/Israel%20Palestine/84%20nurturing%2
0instability%20lebanons%20palestinian%20refugee%20camps.ashx.
77
See U.S. Department of State, “Country Reports on Terrorism 2009,” Chapter 3. State Sponsors of Terrorism,
available at http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/crt/2009/140889.htm.
78
Transcript of remarks by Khaled Meshaal, Al Jazeera TV, December 15, 2009, Open Source Document
GMP20091215648001 (translated from Arabic).
79
Fitfield, op. cit; Thanassis Cambanis, A Privilege to Die: Inside Hezbollah’s Legions and Their Endless War Against
Israel, Free Press, New York, 2010, pp. 17, 267-272.
80
See Council on Foreign Relations Backgrounder, “Hamas,” updated August 27, 2009, available at
http://www.cfr.org/publication/8968/#p8; Matthew Levitt, “The Real Connection Between Iran and Hamas,”
Counterterrorism Blog, January 12, 2009, available at
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2009/01/the_real_connection_between_ir.php.
81
See, e.g., Ehud Yaari, “Sunni Hamas and Shiite Iran Share a Common Political Theology,” Washington Institute of
Near East Policy, PolicyWatch #1716, November 9, 2010.

Congressional Research Service

22

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

linguistic differences between Palestinians (who are predominantly Arab, Sunni, and Arabicspeaking) and Iranians (who are mostly non-Arab, Shiite, and Persian-speaking).
Iran’s future influence over the Palestinian political scene seems tied to Hamas’s fortunes, which
have been on the rise since Hamas’s political emergence in the late-1980s, and bolstered by its
victory in Palestinian Legislative Council elections in 2006 and takeover of Gaza in 2007.
Possible Iranian-supported smuggling of weapons, cash, and other contraband into the Gaza
Strip,82 along with Iranian training for Gaza-based Hamas militants (who are able to travel to and
from Iran and Lebanon after using the Gaza-Sinai tunnels), 83 is believed to reinforce both
Hamas’s ability to maintain order and control over Gaza and its population, and Palestinian
militants’ ability to fire mortars and rockets into Israel.84

Charities and Individuals
U.S. officials and many analysts have concluded that, drawing upon its historical roots in and
continuing ties to the Palestinian dawa (social welfare) community, Hamas receives much of its
support from private individuals and organizations in the Palestinian diaspora and greater Arab
and Muslim worlds (particularly in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states).85 Since 1995, the United
States has taken active measures—in concert with Israel, the PA, and other international actors—
to disrupt Hamas’s use of charities as front organizations (see Table 4 below and Appendix A for
additional details).
Table 4. U.S.Terrorist Designations and Financial Sanctions Against Hamas and
Affiliates
Hamas Designation

Statutory Basis

Specially Designated
Terrorist (SDT)

International Emergency
Economic Powers Act

January 1995
Executive Order 12947

(P.L. 95-223, 50 U.S.C.
§1701, et seq.)

Financial Sanctions

Subject to Civil and/or
Criminal Liabilitya

Blocks all U.S. property of
SDT (or of party controlled
by SDT or acting on its
behalf)

Any transaction or dealing
by a U.S. person or within
the United States with SDT
or SDT property

82

Uzi Mahnaimi, “US navy seeks arms bound for Hamas,” The Sunday Times (UK), January 25, 2009.
Byman, op. cit.
84
According to the State Department, in 2009, “Iran remained the principal supporter of groups that are implacably
opposed to the Middle East Peace Process. The Qods Force, the external operations branch of the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is the regime’s primary mechanism for cultivating and supporting terrorists
abroad. Iran provided weapons, training, and funding to HAMAS and other Palestinian terrorist groups, including
Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC).”
U.S. Department of State, “Country Reports on Terrorism 2009,” Chapter 3, op. cit. See also Marie Colvin, “Hamas
Wages Iran’s Proxy War on Israel,” The Sunday Times (UK), March 9, 2008.
85
See U.S. Treasury Department press release: “U.S. Designates Five Charities Funding Hamas and Six Senior Hamas
Leaders as Terrorist Entities,” August 22, 2003, available at http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js672.htm; U.S.
Treasury Department press release: “Treasury Designates Al-Salah Society Key Support Node for Hamas,” August 7,
2007, available at http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/hp531.htm. See also Don Van Natta, Jr., with Timothy L.
O’Brien, “Flow of Saudi Cash to Hamas Is Under Scrutiny by U.S.,” New York Times, September 17, 2003.
83

Congressional Research Service

23

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Hamas Designation
Foreign Terrorist
Organization (FTO)
October 1997
State Department
Specially Designated
Global Terrorist (SDGT)
October 2001
Treasury Department
(Under Executive Order
13224)

Statutory Basis
Antiterrorism and Effective
Death Penalty Act of 1996
(P.L. 104-132, 110 Stat.
1214-1319)
International Emergency
Economic Powers Act
(P.L. 95-223, 50 U.S.C.
§1701, et seq.)

Financial Sanctions

Subject to Civil and/or
Criminal Liabilitya

Requires financial
institutions to block all
funds in which FTOs or
their agents have an
interest

U.S. persons providing
material support or
resources to FTOs; failure
of financial institutions to
block funds

Blocks all U.S. property of
SDGT (or of party
controlled by SDGT or
acting on its behalf) and of
those who provide material
support to SDGT

Any transaction or dealing
by a U.S. person or within
the United States with
SDGT or SDGT property

Directs executive branch
to work with other
countries to prevent acts of
terrorism, deny financing to
terrorists, and share
intelligence about terrorist
funding activities

Source: U.S. Treasury Department, Office of Foreign Assets Control, “What You Need to Know About U.S.
Sanctions,” available at http://www.ustreas.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/programs/terror/terror.pdf.
a.

See footnote 87 and footnote 88, respectively, for discussion of the statutory bases for U.S. criminal and
civil liability for material support of terrorism (18 U.S.C. §2333, §2339A, §2339B).

Yet, it appears that, either through the international banking system or the Gaza-Sinai smuggling
tunnels (or both), Hamas’s political and military wings both still receive funding from their own
networks of affiliated Islamic charities,86 including some that have operated and may still operate
in the United States, Canada, and Europe. The most illustrative case was that of the Texas-based
Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), once the largest Islamic charity in the
United States. After U.S. investigators determined that HLF was funneling money to Hamas and
had close ties with Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzouk when he lived in the United States in the
early 1990s, the Treasury Department named HLF a specially designated global terrorist (SDGT)
in 2001 and froze its assets. In 2008, five HLF leaders (four of whom are U.S. citizens) were
found guilty on criminal charges of providing more than $12 million in material support to
Hamas (through contributions to Hamas-linked charities) after President Bill Clinton had named
Hamas a specially designated terrorist (SDT) by executive order in 1995.87 For providing
financing, HLF and two affiliated organizations also were found liable in 2004 in federal civil
court for the 1996 Hamas shooting death of an Israeli-American dual citizen in Jerusalem,
although the verdict against HLF was reversed on appeal in 2007 on procedural grounds.88
86
Matthew Levitt and Michael Jacobson, The Money Trail: Finding, Following, and Freezing Terrorist Finances,
Washington Institute for Near East Policy, Policy Focus #89, November 2008, available at
http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/pubPDFs/PolicyFocus89.pdf.
87
See U.S. Department of Justice press release, Holy Land Foundation, Leaders, Accused of Providing Material
Support to Hamas Terrorist Organization, July 27, 2004, available at
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2004/July/04_crm_514.htm. Criminal liability for material support of terrorism is
authorized under 18 U.S.C. §2339A and §2339B. For further information, see CRS Report R41333, Terrorist Material
Support: An Overview of 18 U.S.C. 2339A and 2339B, by (name redacted).
88
Laura B. Rowe, “Ending Terrorism with Civil Remedies: Boim v. Holy Land Foundation and the Proper Framework
of Liability,” 4 Seventh Circuit Review 372 (2009), available at http://www.kentlaw.edu/7cr/v4-2/rowe.pdf. In addition
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

24

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

The December 2004 findings of the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (an Israeli
non-governmental organization), as paraphrased in a November 2008 Washington Institute for
Near East Policy report, claimed that there were two separate categories of Hamas-linked
charitable fronts:
The first category includes those fronts directly tied to Hamas. These typically employ
Hamas activists, are established with the assistance of the Hamas political leadership, and see
the vast majority of their funds dispensed to Hamas charities in the West Bank and Gaza.
Such charities bring in an estimated $15–$20 million a year and include the Palestinian
Relief and Development Fund (Interpal) and the al-Aqsa International Foundation, among
others. The second category includes fronts that support radical Islamist elements generally
but are not Hamas specific. A majority of these fronts are based in Persian Gulf states and
most of the funds they send to the West Bank and Gaza are also channeled through Hamas
organizations there.89

In November 2008, the Treasury Department identified one of these alleged front organizations, a
Saudi Arabia-based charity known as the Union of Good, as an SDGT, claiming that the
organization had been responsible for the transfer of tens of millions of dollars to Hamasmanaged associations in the Palestinian territories. The Union of Good is reportedly chaired by
Yusuf al Qaradawi,90 a renowned Egyptian scholar of Islam and Hamas supporter based in Qatar
whose popular religious program on the Al Jazeera satellite television channel attracts
approximately 40 million viewers. At the time of the Union’s SDGT designation, the Treasury
Department stated:
The leadership of Hamas created the Union of Good in late-2000, shortly after the start of the
second Intifada, in order to facilitate the transfer of funds to Hamas. The Union of Good acts
as a broker for Hamas by facilitating financial transfers between a web of charitable
organizations—including several organizations previously designated under E.O. 13224 for
providing support to Hamas—and Hamas-controlled organizations in the West Bank and
Gaza. The primary purpose of this activity is to strengthen Hamas' political and military
position in the West Bank and Gaza, including by: (i) diverting charitable donations to
support Hamas members and the families of terrorist operatives; and (ii) dispensing social
welfare and other charitable services on behalf of Hamas…. [S]ome of the funds transferred
by the Union of Good have compensated Hamas terrorists by providing payments to the
families of suicide bombers.91

According to the Israel Security Agency (also known as the Shin Bet), several Islamic charitable
organizations withdrew their funding from the Union of Good shortly after its SDGT
designation. 92

(...continued)
to other civil penalties that may accrue, civil liability for damages caused by a party’s support of terrorism is authorized
under 18 U.S.C. §2333, which states: “Any national of the United States injured in his or her person, property, or
business by reason of an act of international terrorism … may sue therefor … and shall recover threefold the damages
he or she sustains…”
89
Levitt and Jacobson, op. cit., citing the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center.
90
Israel Security Agency (also known as the Shin Bet), “The Union of Good – Analysis and Mapping of Terror Funds
Network,” available at http://www.shabak.gov.il/SiteCollectionImages/english/TerrorInfo/coalition_en.pdf.
91
U.S. Treasury Department press release HP-1267, “Treasury Designates the Union of Good,” November 12, 2008,
available at http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/hp1267.htm.
92
Israel Security Agency, op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

25

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Some analysts believe that Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups may benefit from tradebased money laundering.93 Charities, companies, and individuals purchase high-demand
commodities like sugar, tea, coffee, and cooking oil to be sold in Palestinian areas because of the
scarcity of these items under the Israeli-Egyptian closure regime. Orders can be worth hundreds
of thousands of dollars.94 Some groups, such as the Anti-Defamation League, have raised
concerns over the participation of U.S. citizens and use of private U.S. funds in protest convoys
(including the May 2010 Mavi Marmara flotilla discussed below—see “International
Dimensions”) directed at the Israeli-Egyptian closure regime that have raised money and donated
supplies to Palestinians in Gaza, partly because of the difficulty in confirming that the recipients
are not linked with Hamas. In July 2009, approximately 200 U.S. activists participated in a
convoy organized by the British organization Viva Palestina (led by then British parliamentarian
George Galloway) that entered Gaza from Egypt and donated approximately $500,000 worth of
medical supplies (purchased from funds raised in the United States earlier in 2009) to Palestinian
groups.95

Possible Options for Congress
In considering legislative and oversight options, Congress can assess how Hamas has emerged
and adapted over time, and also scrutinize the track record of U.S., Israeli, and international
policy to counter Hamas. There have been multiple attempts to marginalize Hamas through a
variety of measures—political and foreign aid strategies, financial sanctions, arrests and
deportations, physical blockades and border closures, and Israeli military operations and
assassinations. Some of these measures have achieved temporary or partial success, but none has
yet prevented Hamas from playing a major role in Israeli-Palestinian politics or prevented
assistance to Hamas from states and other non-state actors in its region. Some might contend that
U.S. policy with respect to Hamas since its initial U.S. terrorist designation in 1995 has
strengthened instead of weakened the organization given its increased regional and international
profile. Perhaps U.S. policy also has increased Hamas’s reliance on the type of grassroots support
that is not easily countered by governmental means. Others might say that the proper goal is to
further strengthen the measures that have achieved temporary or partial success.
The following questions could be useful in evaluating legislative or oversight options:
•

Is Hamas stronger than it was five years ago? 15 years ago? Why or why not?
Have its rivals become stronger or weaker over that same period of time?
(Strength could be measured by one of more of the following factors: popularity,
military force, leverage with Israel, regional and global influence.)

93

Glenn R. Simpson and Benoit Faucon, “A Trail of Sugar to Gaza,” Wall Street Journal, July 2, 2007.
For example, an allegedly suspicious 2005 food shipment to Gaza by the Comité de Bienfaisance et de Secours aux
Palestiniens, a French organization the United States considers to be a Specially Designated Terrorist Organization due
to its ties to Hamas, was worth $521,130. Simpson and Faucon, op. cit.
95
Anti-Defamation League, “Viva Palestina: Supporting Hamas Under the Guise of Humanitarianism,” July 22, 2009,
available at http://www.adl.org/main_Anti_Israel/galloway_us_tour_09.htm?Multi_page_sections=sHeading_4.
Concerns about possible links to Hamas may have been fueled by Galloway’s actions during a previous European
convoy’s trip to Gaza in March 2009, when he gave approximately $1.5 million in cash and 110 vehicles directly to the
Hamas-led regime.
94

Congressional Research Service

26

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

•

What are the United States’ ultimate goals for Israel, the Palestinians, and the
broader region? How do particular options regarding Hamas fit into these goals?

•

What are Hamas’s ultimate goals and how might Hamas act proactively to
achieve these goals? How might it react to particular U.S. options that it
perceives could serve or frustrate these goals?

•

Once implemented, when are various options likely to produce results? What are
U.S. capacities and political will for implementing and monitoring various
options over time? What are intervening variables (i.e., other relevant actors,
other issues that might distract from those addressed by various options, political
timelines) and how might their potential negative impact on different options be
minimized?

•

How would the success of various options be measured?

U.S. Aid to Palestinians
Aid to Strengthen Non-Hamas Groups and Individuals
The current U.S. aid program for the West Bank-based PA led by President Mahmoud Abbas and
Prime Minister Salam Fayyad dates back to June 2007. Since that time, U.S. bilateral assistance
to the West Bank and Gaza Strip has amounted to approximately $2 billion, and assistance to
UNRWA for Palestinian refugees (including in Gaza) has totaled over $700 million. 96
This assistance includes $395.4 million (including $100 million in FY2010 funding) that have
been appropriated or reprogrammed for use in the West Bank since 2007 to train, reform, advise,
house, and provide non-lethal equipment for PA civil security forces in the West Bank loyal to
President Abbas. A small amount of training assistance also has been provided to strengthen and
reform the PA criminal justice sector. The Obama Administration has requested an additional
$150 million in FY2011 funding for the security assistance program, which U.S. officials insist is
only designed for West Bank security, and not for a prospective PA invasion of Hamas’s
stronghold in Gaza.
The current U.S. aid program appears to reflect a threefold strategy with respect to Hamas:

96

•

First, humanitarian aid is provided to Gaza to provide the people with basic needs
and to prevent destabilization.

•

Second, assistance (budgetary, development, security) provided for the West
Bank is intended to create a virtuous cycle of prosperity for Palestinians under
Abbas’s rule to contrast with the relative indigence of Gaza under Hamas, with
the idea that Palestinians will reject the Hamas model and embrace the West
Bank model.

•

Third, the West Bank security assistance is largely intended to combat, neutralize,
and prevent terrorism from Hamas and other militant organizations.

For further information, see CRS Report RS22967, U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians, by (name redacted).

Congressional Research Service

27

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

Reevaluations might focus on the prospects for these three strategies to achieve their purposes.
Some analysts argue that improvements in Palestinians’ material well-being brought about by the
current aid program might be necessary, but are unlikely to be sufficient in achieving lasting
support for non-Hamas political elements without more direct progress on (1) Hamas-Fatah
power-sharing, (2) Palestinian political reform (including presidential and legislative elections),
and/or (3) Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.97 Nathan Brown of the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, a longtime U.S. analyst of Palestinian politics, warned in June 2010 that the
problem with “soldiering on” with the current strategy is that U.S. and Israeli policy inertia cedes
the initiative to other actors:
As has been shown time and again in recent years (most recently with the Gaza blockade),
both Israel and the United States have unfortunately but unmistakably (and quite
consistently) maintained policies until a crisis forces them to reevaluate….
…. A political misstep by the West Bank government, an eruption of violence against Israeli
targets originating either in the West Bank or Gaza, an upsurge in the conflict in Jerusalem,
an extensive Israeli military campaign in Gaza, or the loss of one of the two indispensible
men of the moment (Fayyad and Abbas) would likely leave both countries once more
desperately rather than deliberately adjusting their policies toward internal Palestinian
politics, and doing so most likely on unfavorable terms.98

Some analysts present U.S. involvement with Palestinian politics and institutions over the past 15
years as a cautionary tale,99 stating or implying that the continuation of U.S. policies intended to
present the West Bank as a model for Gazans to emulate might backfire—due either to negative
outcomes or negative perceptions (or both).100
Some members of Congress advocate expanding the level and type of humanitarian and
development assistance to Gaza—often at the same time they advocate easing, ending, or even
challenging the Israeli-Egyptian closure regime—because Gazans are seen as needing more
support to improve their economic, physical, and psychological situations.101 Senator John Kerry,
chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Representatives Brian Baird and Keith
Ellison visited U.N. officials in Gaza in February 2009 (in the first official U.S. government visits
to Gaza since 2003) to highlight Gazans’ needs immediately following Operation Cast Lead.
Representative Baird has since returned to Gaza twice, once in May 2009 with Representatives
Donna Edwards and Peter Welch, and once in February 2010. In January 2010, 54
Representatives signed a letter to President Obama that requested a substantive lifting of the
closure regime. 102
97
See, e.g., Nathan J. Brown, “Fayyad Is Not the Problem, but Fayyadism Is Not the Solution to Palestine’s Political
Crisis,” op. cit.; Michele Dunne, “A Two-State Solution Requires Palestinian Politics,” Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, June 2010, available at http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/palestine_politics.pdf.
98
Nathan J. Brown, “Are Palestinians Building a State?”, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Commentary,
June 2010, available at http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/palestinian_state1.pdf.
99
See Dunne, op. cit.
100
See, e.g., Mohammed Najib, “Struggling on – Khaled Mashal, political chief of Hamas,” Jane’s Intelligence Weekly,
August 20, 2010.
101
For further information on conditions in Gaza, see, e.g., Amnesty International UK, et al., “Dashed Hopes:
Continuation of the Gaza Blockade,” November 30, 2010, available at
http://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/dashed-hopes-continuation-gaza-blockade-301110-en.pdf; Sarah A.
Topol, “‘Gaza Is Not Darfur!’”, Slate.com, August 5, 2010.
102
Text of Letter to the President, January 20, 2010, available at
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

28

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

U.S. Security Assistance in the West Bank103
As mentioned above, the Bush and Obama Administrations have given non-lethal aid for PA civil
security forces in the West Bank loyal to President Abbas in an effort both to counter militants
from Hamas and other militants, and to establish the rule of law for an expected Palestinian state.
This U.S. assistance program exists alongside other assistance and training programs reportedly
provided to Palestinian security forces and intelligence organizations by the European Union and
various countries, including probable covert U.S. assistance programs.104 By most accounts, the
PA forces receiving training have shown increased professionalism and have helped substantially
improve law and order and lower the profile of terrorist organizations in West Bank cities.
However, the aspiration to coordinate international security assistance efforts and to consolidate
the various PA security forces under unified civilian control that is accountable to rule of law and
to human rights norms remains largely unfulfilled. PA forces have come under criticism for the
political targeting of Hamas—in collaboration with Israel and the United States—through
massive shutdowns and forced leadership changes to West Bank charities with alleged ties to
Hamas members and through reportedly arbitrary detentions of Hamas members and
supporters.105 A September-October 2010 Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research poll
indicated that 76% of Palestinians (with opinions nearly uniform between Gazans and West
Bankers) opposed or strongly opposed the PA’s mass arrests of Hamas members and sympathizers
following Hamas’s August-September 2010 shooting attacks against Israeli settlers in the West
Bank.106 Some Palestinians and outside observers also assert that the effectiveness and credibility
of PA operations are undermined by Israeli restrictions—including curfews, checkpoints, no-go
zones, and limitations on international arms and equipment transfers—as well as by Israel’s own
security operations in the West Bank107 and the Gaza closure regime.
(...continued)
http://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fellison.house.gov%2Fimages%2Fstories%2FDocuments%2F201
0%2FGaza_letter_to_Obama.pdf.
103
For more information on this subject, see CRS Report R40664, U.S. Security Assistance to the Palestinian
Authority, by (name redacted); Government Accountability Office, Palestinian Authority: U.S. Assistance Is Training and
Equipping Security Forces, but the Program Needs to Measure Progress and Is Facing Logistical Constraints, May
2010, available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10505.pdf.
104
See, e.g., Ian Cobain, “CIA working with Palestinian security agents,” guardian.co.uk, December 17, 2009; Yezid
Sayigh, “‘Fixing Broken Windows’: Security Sector Reform in Palestine, Lebanon and Yemen,” Carnegie Endowment
for International Peace, October 2009, available at
http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/security_sector_reform.pdf.
105
See, e.g., Nathan Thrall, “Our Man in Palestine,” New York Review of Books, October 14, 2010, available at
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2010/oct/14/our-man-palestine/. For further discussion of human rights
concerns surrounding PA security forces in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza, see CRS Report R40664, U.S. Security
Assistance to the Palestinian Authority, by (name redacted); Human Rights Watch,
Internal Fight: Palestinian Abuses in
Gaza and the West Bank, op. cit.
106
Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No. 37 (September 30-October
2, 2010), available at http://www.pcpsr.org/survey/polls/2010/p37e.html#table.
107
See International Crisis Group, Squaring the Circle: Palestinian Security Reform Under Occupation, Middle East
Report No. 98, September 7, 2010, available at
http://www.crisisgroup.org/~/media/Files/Middle%20East%20North%20Africa/Israel%20Palestine/98%20Squaring%2
0the%20Circle%20--%20Palestinian%20Security%20Reform%20under%20Occupation.ashx; International Crisis
Group, Ruling Palestine II: The West Bank Model? Middle East Report No. 79, July 17, 2008, available at
http://www.crisisgroup.org/library/documents/middle_east___north_africa/arab_israeli_conflict/79_ruling_palestine_ii
___the_west_bank_model.pdf. These operations underscore the fact that the Israeli-Palestinian agreements that
authorized the creation of Palestinian security forces in the 1990s in areas of limited Palestinian self-rule contained
(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

29

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near
East (UNRWA) in Gaza
The United States is the largest single-state donor to UNRWA, which provides food, shelter,
medical care, and education for many of the original refugees from the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and
their descendants—now comprising approximately 4.8 million Palestinians in Jordan, Syria,
Lebanon, the West Bank, and Gaza.108 Most observers acknowledge that the role of UNRWA in
providing basic services (i.e., food, health care, education) in Gaza takes much of the governing
burden off Hamas. As a result, some complain that this amounts to UNRWA’s enabling of Hamas
and is an argument militating for discontinuing or scaling back UNRWA’s activities. However,
many others, U.S. and Israeli officials included, believe that UNRWA plays a valuable role by
providing stability and serving as the eyes and ears of the international community in Gaza. They
generally prefer UNRWA to the uncertain alternative that might emerge if UNRWA were removed
from the picture. 109

Restrictions on Aid to Hamas or PA Government Including Hamas
Under current appropriations legislation, the United States cannot provide financial assistance to
Hamas under any conditions. This law also prohibits U.S. assistance to a PA government with
Hamas ministers unless all the government’s ministers accept the “Section 620K principles”: (1)
recognition of “the Jewish state of Israel’s right to exist” and (2) acceptance of previous IsraeliPalestinian agreements—named after the section in the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006
(P.L. 109-446) that sets them forth. These principles have some similarity to the principles the socalled international Quartet (United States, European Union, United Nations, and Russia) has
required Hamas to meet before accepting dealings with it: (1) recognizing Israel’s right to exist,
(2) renouncing violence, and (3) accepting previous Israeli-Palestinian agreements. Hamas has
alleged that the United States has used its leverage with Abbas to “veto” any serious attempt to
broker a power-sharing compromise (by threatening an aid cutoff if Hamas rejoins the PA without
accepting the Section 620K principles and/or Quartet principles), and some analysts understand
the situation similarly.110
Future debates might focus on the following issues:
•

Whether to relax or tighten U.S. restrictions on which Palestinian party/ies
should be answerable for accepting and complying with the Section 620K
principles.

(...continued)
clauses that preserved Israel’s prerogative to conduct operations in those areas for purposes of its own security.
108
For further information on UNRWA, see CRS Report RS22967, U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians, by (nam
e redacted); and CRS Report RS21668,
United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
(UNRWA), by (name redacted).
109
See FY2011 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, Department of State (Volume 2), p. 86,
available at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/137936.pdf: “U.S. government support for UNRWA directly
contributes to the U.S. strategic interest of meeting the humanitarian needs of Palestinians, while promoting their selfsufficiency. UNRWA plays a stabilizing role in the Middle East through its assistance programs, serving as an
important counterweight to extremist elements.”
110
See Dunne, op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

30

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

•

Whether to grant the U.S. President discretion—under certain conditions and/or
for specific purposes—to waive aid restrictions relating to a power-sharing
government that includes Hamas and does not meet the Section 620K principles.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton gave testimony at an April 2009 congressional hearing
regarding the possibility of Hamas members serving in a PA government that would accept the
Quartet principles and/or the Section 620K principles. She stated that “we are currently funding
the Lebanese government, which has Hezbollah in it” because of a U.S. interest in supporting a
government working to prevent the “further incursion of extremism.”111

U.S. Assistance to Israel to Counter Rocket Threat
The Obama Administration and both houses of Congress have proposed funding to support
Israel’s development of a short-range missile defense system known as Iron Dome that is
designed to counter the rocket threat from Hamas. The United States and Israel also are codeveloping a missile defense system known as David’s Sling that could potentially be deployed
against Hamas’s longer-range rockets.112 For fuller detail on this subject, see CRS Report
RL33222, U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel, by (name redacted); and CRS Report RL33476, Israel:
Background and Relations with the United States, by (name redacted).

Countering Financial and Smuggling Networks
Terrorist Designations and Legal Action
As discussed elsewhere in this report (see “Charities and Individuals” and Appendix A), U.S.
executive orders and designations dating from 1995 that identify Hamas, affiliated organizations,
and some of its leaders as terrorists (see Table 4) have authorized efforts, including those in
concert with other international actors, to target Hamas funding sources. As also discussed
elsewhere, existing anti-terrorism legislation has been used by U.S. courts to find U.S. citizens
and/or organizations civilly and criminally liable for their material support of Hamas. Congress
could evaluate how it might
•

support the Administration’s anti-terrorism financial and legal actions;

•

mandate or advocate complementary or alternative actions; and

•

provide greater oversight.

Some analysts believe that the effectiveness of U.S. cooperation with Israel, the PA, and other
international actors in freezing Hamas’s assets and global financial transfers has hindered
Hamas’s capacity to carry out terrorist attacks and significantly influenced its political decisions
over the past decade—including its attempt to seek popular legitimacy in 2005-2006 Palestinian
elections and its allegedly increased reliance on Iranian support.113 Even though Hamas
111

Transcript of House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs hearing:
“Supplemental Request,” April 23, 2009.
112
U.S.-Israel cooperation also takes place on a missile defense system known as “Arrow” that targets rockets of a
longer range that what Hamas may currently possess.
113
See, e.g., Milton-Edwards and Farrell, op. cit.

Congressional Research Service

31

Hamas: Background and Issues for Congress

physically controls Gaza, the legal banking system there remains answerable to the PA in the
West Bank and still applies controls in deference to U.S. policy. 114 Most analysts believe,
therefore, that smuggling cash and valuable goods (trade-based money laundering) through the
Gaza-Sinai tunnels remains a preferred option for Hamas.115 Increasing scrutiny of charities and
perhaps the specter of legal liability have reduced the effectiveness of Hamas financing networks
in North America and Europe. Yet, political sensitivity to Hamas’s popularity among Arab
populations and an inclination to hedge bets on the outcome of the Fatah-Hamas rivalry may
make Arab governments less likely to crack down on their own charities, even under U.S.
pressure.

Sanctions on Iran and Syria
U.S. and international sanctions against Iran and Syria appear not to have had a significant effect
on the two regimes’ support for Hamas.116 However, supporters of the sanctions may believe that
even if the sanctions do not compel Iran and Syria to curtail or cease support for Hamas, they
might make the two regimes’ future support for Hamas less robust and effective. If sanctions
weaken Iran and Syria in general terms, one could argue, resources and efforts allocated to
helping Hamas and other potential proxies could be redirected to core internal matters related to
regime survival. One, however, also might argue the reverse—that weaker Iranian and Syrian
regimes could be more rather than less likely to sponsor potential proxies in order to draw
domestic attention away from internal problems and focus it on common external adversaries and
issues of regional or international concern.

Anti-Smuggling Efforts in Egypt and Elsewhere
The ongoing Israeli-Egyptian closure regime—consisting of an Israeli naval blockade plus heavy
restrictions on the passage of people and goods through land crossings—places most of the focus
of other anti-smugg

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR41514. Public record. Not legal advice.