By Mohamed Atherulla Shariff
A ‘balance sheet’ of Hamas is necessarily qualitative rather than financial. It depends on the time frame, but if we assess Hamas from the start of the October 7, 2023 attack through mid-2026, the movement has experienced severe military and organisational losses while also achieving some political and strategic objectives. Different observers weigh these outcomes very differently.
Military capability: Many senior political and military leaders have been assassinated. Thousands of fighters have reportedly been martyred, captured, or wounded. A substantial portion of its tunnel network, rocket infrastructure, command centres, and weapons stockpiles has been destroyed or degraded.
Global attention: The Palestinian issue returned to the centre of international politics after years of declining attention.
Regional diplomacy disrupted: The conflict significantly slowed or complicated normalisation efforts between Israel and several Arab states.
International scrutiny of Israel: Israel has faced unprecedented diplomatic, legal, and humanitarian criticism over the conduct of the war.
Territorial control: Hamas has lost effective administrative control over large parts of Gaza.
Public sympathy: Images of widespread destruction in Gaza generated significant international sympathy for Palestinian civilians, although this does not necessarily translate into support for Hamas itself.
Civil administration: Most governmental institutions under Hamas have been severely disrupted.
Prisoner exchanges: Hamas secured the release of Palestinian prisoners through negotiated exchanges.
Economic base: Tax collection, commercial activity, and governance structures have been devastated.
Political relevance: Hamas remains an indispensable actor in discussions on Gaza’s future despite efforts to sideline it.
Civilian infrastructure: Gaza has suffered catastrophic destruction, creating long-term humanitarian and reconstruction challenges.
Recruitment potential: Analysts suggest that prolonged conflict and devastation may create conditions that facilitate future recruitment, although this remains uncertain.
International standing: Hamas remains designated as a terrorist organisation by countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, European Union, and others, limiting its diplomatic engagement.
Survival as an organisation: Despite sustained military operations, Hamas has continued to function in some capacity and has not been completely dismantled.
Military Assessment
Militarily, Hamas has suffered its most severe setback since its founding in 1987. Israeli operations have targeted much of its command structure, tunnel network, weapons manufacturing facilities, and experienced fighters. The destruction in Gaza has also significantly impaired its ability to govern.
At the same time, Hamas has demonstrated organisational resilience. It has continued to conduct guerrilla-style attacks, maintain some command-and-control functions, and participate indirectly in negotiations over ceasefires and hostage releases.
Political Assessment
Politically, the picture is mixed. Achievements claimed by Hamas supporters include: Re-centring the Palestinian issue in international diplomacy, interrupting the momentum of regional normalisation with Israel, forcing renewed discussions on Palestinian statehood, and remaining a key actor despite efforts to eliminate its influence.
Setbacks highlighted by critics include the unprecedented humanitarian devastation in Gaza, massive displacement of the civilian population, reduced governing capacity and continued international isolation and terrorist designation in many jurisdictions.
Humanitarian Cost
The greatest burden has fallen on Gaza’s civilian population. Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been reported killed, many more injured, and most of Gaza’s residents have experienced displacement and severe shortages of food, water, healthcare, and housing. Israel has also suffered substantial losses, including those killed in the October 7 attacks and subsequent military operations.
Strategic Verdict
Whether Hamas has won or lost depends on the metric:
Military: Israel has inflicted extensive damage on Hamas’s military infrastructure and leadership, giving Israel a significant tactical advantage.
Political: Hamas succeeded in making the Palestinian question a central international issue again and complicated some of Israel’s regional diplomatic objectives.
Governance: Hamas’s ability to administer Gaza has been severely weakened.
Humanitarian: The conflict has resulted in catastrophic suffering in Gaza, representing an enormous cost regardless of political or military outcomes.
Overall, most independent analysts characterise the outcome as a strategic paradox: Hamas has suffered devastating military and organisational losses while simultaneously achieving some of its broader political aims. Whether those political gains outweigh the immense military and humanitarian costs remains a matter of considerable debate among scholars, policymakers, and regional experts.
