Hamas 'Refuses Disarmament' - Because It's 2023, Not 1948
Hamas politburo member Mohammed Nazzal stated the group's intent to control Gaza security and inability to commit to disarmament, citing a need to rebuild. Predictably, this is presented as an obstacle to peace, ignoring the elephant in the room: any armed group under occupation, whose population has endured decades of blockade, displacement, and bombings, would struggle to simply 'disarm.' It’s
as if they expect a group governing Gaza under siege since 2007, after winning democratic elections in 2006 (results largely ignored by Western powers), to simply lay down its arms while the occupying power's military budget continues to swell, partly thanks to U.S. aid; historically over $3 billion annually. This narrative carefully omits the historical precedent of virtually every liberation
movement—from the ANC in South Africa to the IRA in Ireland—only disarming *after* a political resolution and guarantees for their people's rights. The idea that a besieged population's resistance fighters should unilaterally disarm while facing ongoing violence, illegal settlements, and daily humiliation is not a demand for peace; it’s a demand for capitulation. How many times must a people be
told to 'trust their oppressors' before we, the media consumers, start questioning the framing?