There have been recent calls for Hamas to “shed its ideological cloak,” abandon its Islamist stance, and transform into a “national liberation” movement. Proponents of this idea argue that the “ideological constraint” hinders Hamas and prevents it from making progress in Arab and international political environments that are negatively sensitive to Islamic movements. Removing this cloak would enable many parties to engage openly with Hamas, thereby facilitating its effective political participation in the Palestinian arena and enhancing its role and influence.
On the face of it, this argument seems logical, wrapped in a spirit of interest and the necessities of the phase. In a previous article, “Operation al-Aqsa Flood and the Bolstering of the Islamic Project for Palestine” I discussed and highlighted several aspects related to the Islamic political thought of Hamas and the Islamic Resistance, as well as the sensitivity of some towards it. In this article, I will not reiterate the points previously discussed. Instead, I will explore the concept of “removing the cloak” and address some of the questions raised by the previous article.
First: Identity or Functional Tool?!
While the movement’s ideology, doctrine, vision and goals are rooted in Islam; the organization is established, individuals are trained, and cadres are prepared in accordance with Islamic principles; the Da‘wah (calling to Islam), educational, social and political activities of the movement are based on the rules and ethics of Islam; the steadfastness and resilience persist, and the movement continues to present martyrs, the wounded, prisoners and displaced people, and sacrifices are made—money, position, and home—for the sake of Islam; the popular and political rise is achieved by the grace of Allah and the believers’ conviction in the ideology, as well as the people’s trust in the credibility of these resistance members… ; yet, when it comes to reaping the benefits of this “divine” project…. some suggest that those in charge of the project abandon their “identity,” arguing that it is no longer suitable for harvesting the fruits of their achievements!!
In other words, the identity and the project have become tools that that have been used and expired. According to the advocates, religion or Islamic ideology is no longer a source of benefit but rather a burden… Pragmatism has become the basis!!
Accordingly, one raises members, works, struggles and sacrifices as an Islamist… Then, when submitting credentials for political leadership, one presents oneself as a secularist!!!
This is not merely a change or removal of a “cloak” or “robe” related to a formal or superficial matter, but rather a fundamental transformation in essence, affecting both the “mind” and “heart.” It is intrinsically linked to identity, ideology and method of action. Such a change carries the risk of losing one’s strengths, the trust of the grassroots who believe in the idea and project, as well as losing divine approval and support.
The danger in this approach to argument lies in compromising the very foundations and identity that define and guide a person. By doing so, one risks sacrificing what is most precious, conditioning oneself to yield on critical principles—essentially inviting adversaries to exert pressure to compromise these fundamentals.
Second: The Islamic Resistance is Fundamentally a Liberation Movement:
There is an artificial or clichéd aspect to discussing the transition from an Islamic ideological movement to a national liberation movement. It is as if the mobilization, resistance and sacrifices that the movement has undertaken since its founding are separate from the concept of liberation!!
By its nature, composition, raison d’être, education, approach, political discourse and performance on the ground, Hamas is a genuine national liberation movement, and there’s no need for it to change its essence!! It presents its vision for achieving national liberation through its Islamic framework, as it believes it is the most capable of accomplishing this project. Therefore, the notion of a necessary transition, removal or departure from its Islamic identity is unjustified unless the aim is to make the national liberation project dependent on the abandonment of the Islamic project. The question is: Why do some people insist that it must shed its Islamic identity to be recognized as a national liberation movement?!
The Palestinian arena is filled with factions that define themselves as “national liberation movements,” yet they are willing to cede most of historic Palestine, recognize Israel, coordinate security with the occupier and pursue resistance forces!!
Therefore, the issue isn’t about form and definition, but about identity and substance. Their insistence clearly aims to shift the focus and prioritize an idea devoid of intellectual or ideological depth, which then dominates everything else. Then, the Islamic vision and project become merely one perspective or a “parameter” among many others, to be considered or ignored based on those who assess the “interest.” The Islamic reference is thereby diminished, becoming a dependent value, governed rather than governing, and subject to a slogan that can be filled with any content!!
Third: Gaining Acceptance by Others:
Some argue that transforming into a “national liberation” movement is necessary to gain acceptance from both official and popular forces, both Arab and international.
The question here is whether the issue with these people lies in the external framework of the movement, the way it presents itself, or the essence of the project it carries?!
If the movement adopts a “national” vocabulary and language that diverges from the “Islamic ideology” language or spirit, but still maintains Islamic education, curriculum, organizational structure, jihadist mobilization, the line of resistance, refusal to give up any part of Palestine, and non-recognition of Israel… would it be warmly welcomed? Or would it still face the issue of others demanding that it conform to their standards?!
When major Palestinian movements and factions met the conditions set by others and adapted to their requirements, did they achieve any of their significant aspirations for liberation and return?!
Those who admire one’s dedication to his country, his sacrifices, his achievements on the ground, and the popular support this individual has garnered… They share the core human values of truth, justice and freedom with this person… They value this individual’s ideological identity not for its own sake, but because this person has exemplified it effectively.
Concerning individuals who oppose or antagonize others due to their religious background or commitment to the resistance and liberation cause, they persist in their hostility even if one changes his outward stance. What troubles them is the alteration of the fundamental essence of one’s project, and they are not easily misled by surface-level changes.
Fourth: Extending the Cloak, Rather Than Removing It
Some sincere individuals advocate for evolving the discourse to present the movement as a “national liberation” movement. This would aim to encompass various political movements and forces (nationalist, leftist, liberal…) and to form national partnerships, ultimately leading to putting the Palestinian house in order and leading the Palestinian people.
Undoubtedly, opening up to the national community, forging alliances and focusing on commonalities are essential aspects of Palestinian political action. Hamas and other groups must work on these aspects seriously and effectively.
It is worth noting that Hamas’s political discourse since its inception has generally been nationalist, inclusive and open-minded, as anyone who reads its political literature from 1987 to the present will realize.
Second, assimilation and openness do not require the removal or sidelining of “ideological” identity. The “Islamic” ideology, when properly understood and adhered to, encompasses advanced mechanisms for openness, assimilation and finding common ground. This includes shared values in morality, loyalty, respect for covenants and pacts, sacrifice, altruism, serving higher interests and observing gradualism.
Thus, Islamists may need to revise their behavior and performance, develop their political discourse, adopt more open language, and refine their terminology and standards to eliminate rigidity and exclusiveness. They should also broaden the scope of permissible political actions. This does not mean abandoning their principles, but rather expanding and enhancing their approach within the same framework.
Third, just as we respect others’ leftist, nationalist and liberal ideologies without asking them to abandon their intellectual and ideological specificities, it is equally important for others to respect the “Islamic” ideology, especially since it has demonstrated its “national” depth, popular breadth and actual achievements.
Fourth, if loyalists demand that the slogan of “national liberation” should be embraced without compromising the movement’s identity or original nature, there’s no need for its leaders and members to conceal this identity. It’s neither “shameful” nor “harmful”! Instead, it’s a source of pride and a key to its success. If others have concerns about one’s “offerings,” it’s essential not to conceal them but to showcase them clearly and address any doubts. It’s crucial to be true to oneself, which can potentially win over more hearts and minds.
Many people have questions and concerns about the Islamic project. These are not resolved through avoidance or concession, which can convey helplessness and lack of self-confidence, or through excessive pragmatism, which may even increase suspicions about hidden agendas. Instead, openness, clear answers and confidence in both oneself and the project are key to addressing these concerns. Many have questions about their experiences, and they want to learn the secrets behind the movement’s heroic deeds and legendary popularity. They hope to be inspired or to join in, but avoiding them shuts the door and weakens their support.
Fifth: Creativity in the Idea and the Message:
Islamic ideology itself is not problematic, but its presentation may raise concerns!! The sensitivities of others should not dictate one’s identity, just as one’s own sensitivities should not define others’ identities. Each side should strive to do its best, and let differences be a celebration of diversity rather than a source of conflict.
When the Messenger of Allah (SAW) built his state in Medina and established his Islamic system, one third of its inhabitants were still non-believers or hypocrites, and another third were Jewish. Yet, he integrated them all with a civilized and humane spirit, without compromising his Islamic principles or ideological identity.
When Sheikh ‘Izz al-Din al-Qassam initiated the revolution in Palestine, his turban became a source of pride and inspiration for Palestinians across all parties, sects and segments. He was affectionately known as Abu al-Wataniyyah (father of patriotism). Similarly, during the 1930s and 1940s, Haj Amin al-Hussaini, the Mufti of Palestine, led the Palestinian national movement and enjoyed widespread popularity among both Christians and Muslims. The use of religious terminology in forming the “Holy Jihad” forces did not deter Christians from joining and participating in heroic actions alongside their Muslim counterparts.
Therefore, what is needed is not to alter or discard the identity, but to innovate through it. It is incorrect to view Islamic ideology merely as a “burden,” “barrier” or “fanaticism.” Instead, it should be seen as a civilizational, cultural, historical, and human identity that has demonstrated success over centuries in fostering peaceful and progressive coexistence among diverse ethnicities and sects. Consequently, members of the Islamic movement bear the responsibility of presenting their ideology as a catalyst and a cornerstone of qualitative value.
We do not need to reiterate what was previously discussed in the previous article about the positive impact of this ideology on personal development, its effective role in societal performance, its ability to rally the masses, its inspirational and mobilizing influence on the Ummah (Muslim nation), its role as a stronghold for fundamentals, principles and cultural identity, and its defense against corruption and Western influences. Before and after that, we continue to pray for Allah’s approval, help, victory and support for those who uphold His banner and follow His guidance.
Sixth: Islamic Movements and Historical Failures
The historical failure of many Islamic movements was linked to their success at the individual, family, community, popular mobilization and political opposition levels. However, a key part of their failure was the inability to move from community leadership to state leadership, and the lack of clear visions stemming from themselves, their ideology and their project to answer the big questions and challenges they face.
A recurring issue, as seen in events like the Arab Spring, was the pressure on several movements to transform into a “national movement” by diluting their Islamic identity or “removing the ideological cloak”… In all instances where the movement compromised by removing or adjusting its cloak to accommodate external conditions… the outcome was a loss of direction and support among the people. Instead of winning over opponents and critics, these movements inadvertently provided opportunities for them to exploit weaknesses and undermine their strength.
The Islamists, who have adeptly engaged with various spectrums and alliances, should recognize the importance of simultaneously strengthening the Islamic identity. This involves deepening its popularity both locally and internationally, and reinforcing it institutionally, rather than marginalizing or abandoning it in an attempt to appease others.
***
In conclusion, the Islamic resistance project inherently embodies the concept of “national liberation” and should articulate it within the framework of its project and its broader human and civilizational vision. It should not be overshadowed by slogans lacking clear substance, and it is essential to broaden its scope of engagement and integration with all ideologies and movements.
Finally, I had not intended to discuss this matter under these circumstances, but it has been raised and imposed by some, necessitating a clear response.
