By: Fern Sidman

In a development that further blurs the already fraught line between journalism and terrorist activity in the Gaza Strip, mounting evidence suggests that Anas al-Sharif — one of Al Jazeera Arabic’s most prominent Gaza correspondents — operated as a political and military operative for Hamas before and during the Iranian-backed terrorist group’s ongoing war with Israel.

As The Algemeiner reported on Thursday, official records, intelligence claims, and public footage point to a history of close association between al-Sharif and Hamas leadership. This alleged alignment, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) asserts, placed him not merely in the realm of sympathetic reporting but in an operational role within Hamas’s military apparatus.

Al-Sharif, who was killed on August 10, 2025, along with four colleagues in an Israeli airstrike near Gaza City’s al-Shifa Hospital, had been lauded internationally as “The Voice of Gaza” on Al Jazeera. Yet, Israeli officials maintain he was at the time of his death “the head of a Hamas terrorist cell” involved in advancing rocket attacks on both Israeli civilian areas and IDF positions.

Lt. Col. Nadav Shoshani, the IDF’s international spokesman, stated on X that intelligence gathered by Israel demonstrated al-Sharif was “an active Hamas military wing operative” who even received a salary from the organization. According to the information provided in The Algemeiner report, the IDF released photographs purportedly showing al-Sharif with senior Hamas leaders including Yahya Sinwar and Khalil al-Hayya, as well as attending Hamas gatherings both before and after his rise in prominence on Al Jazeera.

The military’s dossier contends that al-Sharif’s journalism was not a cover for independent reporting but part of a broader ecosystem in which Hamas-affiliated media figures acted as both propagandists and participants in the group’s operational activities.

Al-Sharif’s alleged ties to Hamas predate his tenure with Al Jazeera. The BBC has acknowledged that he previously worked directly on a Hamas-affiliated media team. This background, The Algemeiner report noted, was instrumental in positioning him to become one of Al Jazeera’s most recognizable correspondents in Gaza after 2023. His prominence grew alongside the war, enabling him to shape narratives reaching millions of viewers across the Arab world.

This history has prompted questions over Al Jazeera’s editorial gatekeeping and the network’s willingness to employ individuals with documented connections to armed factions — particularly in Gaza, where access and survival often require alignment with Hamas’s de facto authorities.

Perhaps the most disturbing allegation comes from recently surfaced court documents reviewed in The Algemeiner report. These purport to show that on October 7, 2023 — the day Hamas carried out its unprecedented cross-border massacre in southern Israel, brutally murdering 1,200 people and abducting 251 hostages — al-Sharif celebrated the atrocities in a pro-Hamas Telegram group.

“Nine hours and the heroes [of Hamas’s Qassam Brigades and other fighters] are still roaming through the houses [of Israelis] killing and capturing,” he wrote. “God, God, how great they are!”

The perception of al-Sharif as part of Hamas’s ruling structure was not confined to Israeli intelligence assessments. In March 2025, anti-Hamas protests erupted in northern Gaza — a rare public display of dissent in the tightly controlled enclave. Video obtained by The Algemeiner shows demonstrators calling out al-Sharif by name while denouncing Hamas leaders.

Outside al-Shifa Hospital, protesters accused both al-Sharif and Al Jazeera of refusing to cover the grassroots demonstrations, instead perpetuating a narrative that Hamas continued to enjoy broad popular legitimacy. Chants of “Hamas, out!” and “Hey, hey, Hamas are terrorists” rang out as al-Sharif’s team remained inside the hospital, declining to air footage of the protests.

Critics alleged that this editorial decision aligned with Hamas’s interest in suppressing evidence of domestic opposition. For Al Jazeera, it reinforced accusations that its Gaza correspondents act more as embedded political communicators than independent reporters.

Al Jazeera’s track record in Gaza reveals other cases of correspondents gaining rare and highly controlled access to Hamas’s military infrastructure. The Algemeiner report cited the example of reporter Mustafa Ashour, who was given an exclusive tour of Hamas’s tunnel network alongside armed commanders — access denied to all other media outlets.

Similarly, other Gaza-based journalists, such as Hussam Shabat, have been killed in Israeli strikes that the IDF says targeted militants with dual roles in combat and media. This pattern, Israel argues, reflects a deliberate Hamas strategy of embedding operatives within press organizations to exploit the protections afforded to journalists under international law.

Further complicating al-Sharif’s legacy are claims, circulated on a Gaza Telegram channel allegedly affiliated with the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, that he had provided Hamas internal security with information on anti-Hamas dissidents, leading to their arrest or elimination.

While no corroborating evidence has been made public, The Algemeiner report underscored that such practices have precedent. In 2020, journalist Hind Khoudary publicly identified peace activist Rami Aman to Hamas officials after he participated in a video call with Israelis. Aman was subsequently arrested and tortured by Hamas’s internal security apparatus. Khoudary has since joined Al Jazeera English as a reporter since the war began.

These allegations, even if unproven, add to the perception among some Gazans that prominent journalists in the territory serve as enforcers of Hamas’s political monopoly.

Ironically, one of al-Sharif’s last public statements appeared to show some willingness to criticize Hamas leadership. In comments shortly before his death, he faulted Hamas negotiators for bearing partial responsibility for the worsening humanitarian situation in northern Gaza.

Yet, this criticism was measured and tactical, aimed more at the group’s negotiating posture than its overall governance or ideology. To his detractors, it was too little, too late — a token rebuke from someone who had long benefited from Hamas’s patronage.

The August 10 airstrike that killed al-Sharif drew swift condemnation from major international outlets, including the BBC, CNN, and Sky News, all of which accused Israel of engaging in a pattern of targeting journalists in Gaza.

Israel, however, maintains that al-Sharif was a legitimate military target. The IDF’s position, as conveyed to The Algemeiner, is that his operational role in Hamas made him subject to the laws of armed conflict, which permit strikes on individuals directly participating in hostilities.

Al-Sharif’s case highlights a broader and deeply uncomfortable reality in Gaza: the overlap between the press corps and the political-military structures of Hamas. In an environment where Hamas controls access, accreditation, and often the physical safety of journalists, the potential for co-optation is immense.

As The Algemeiner report pointed out, this dynamic complicates international assessments of Israel’s conduct during the war. Strikes on journalists may, in some cases, be strikes on combatants who also hold media credentials. Conversely, the targeting of legitimate journalists — if and when it occurs — further erodes the norms protecting the press in conflict zones.

The emerging portrait of Anas al-Sharif is one of dual identities: celebrated Gaza correspondent and, according to Israeli intelligence, embedded Hamas operative. The photographic evidence, employment history, and contested but persistent allegations of operational involvement challenge the simplistic narrative of a journalist killed in the line of duty.

For Israel, his death was the removal of a dangerous military actor. For much of the international media, it was an attack on press freedom. For some Gazans, particularly those who have dared protest against Hamas, it was the fall of a figure they saw as part of the ruling apparatus that has stifled dissent for nearly two decades.

As The Algemeiner report noted, the truth of al-Sharif’s activities may never be fully disentangled from the propaganda, suspicion, and secrecy that define life in Hamas-controlled Gaza. But the evidence now in the public domain — from his pre-Al Jazeera media work with Hamas affiliates to his appearances alongside senior leaders — ensures that his legacy will remain contested, and that his death will continue to be a flashpoint in the debate over where journalism ends and terrorism begins.