By: Fern Sidman- Jewish Voice News

As Gaza staggers through the wreckage of more than two years of war, a volatile new chapter is unfolding beneath the surface of international diplomacy and ceasefire declarations. Anti-Hamas armed groups inside the enclave have vowed to intensify their campaign against the ruling Palestinian terrorist organization, even after the killing of their most prominent commander — a development that, rather than restoring Hamas’s grip, has exposed deep fractures in Gaza’s internal power structure. According to a report on Thursday in The Algemeiner, the emerging struggle reflects a complex contest between Hamas’s determination to preserve its armed dominance and the growing defiance of rival Palestinian factions seeking to chart an alternative future for the territory.

At the center of this escalating confrontation stands Ghassan al-Dahini, the newly installed commander of Gaza’s Popular Forces, who has pledged to continue the project launched by his predecessor and close confidant, Yasser Abu Shabab. Abu Shabab, a Bedouin tribal leader based in Israeli-held Rafah in southern Gaza, was killed last week while mediating an internal dispute within the movement — a death that many observers view as both a symbolic and operational blow to anti-Hamas resistance inside the enclave.

Yet Dahini has made clear that Abu Shabab’s killing will not halt the movement. “This is a grave loss,” he told Israel’s Channel 14 in remarks cited by The Algemeiner, adding that his followers would “continue on this path and move with the same strength and even more strength.” In a striking declaration of ambition, Dahini insisted that the Popular Forces would grow into “the most powerful force” in Gaza — a statement that illustrates how far internal Palestinian resistance to Hamas has evolved since the war erupted.

Hamas, for its part, responded with characteristic ferocity. In an official statement following Abu Shabab’s death, the terrorist group warned that the fate of anyone who “betrayed their people and homeland and agreed to be an instrument in the hands of the occupation” was inevitable. Abu Shabab was accused of committing “criminal acts” and of engaging in what Hamas described as a “flagrant deviation from national and social consensus.”

As The Algemeiner has reported, Hamas has consistently framed its rivals not as political opponents but as traitors — a rhetorical tactic designed to justify extreme violence. In what appeared to be an effort to capitalize on Abu Shabab’s death, Hamas reportedly issued a 10-day ultimatum to militants in rival factions, offering amnesty in exchange for surrender, according to Israel’s Channel 12 and social media reports monitored by Israeli intelligence.

Superficially, Abu Shabab’s death seemed to hand Hamas a tactical advantage. He had been publicly branded a collaborator, and Hamas fighters had reportedly been ordered to kill or capture him. But developments since his killing suggest the opposite: rather than intimidating rival militias into submission, Hamas’s actions have accelerated coordination among its enemies.

The roots of this internal conflict trace back to October, when a US-backed ceasefire temporarily halted large-scale fighting between Israel and Hamas. As The Algemeiner documented at the time, Hamas quickly moved to reassert control over Gaza’s devastated landscape, attempting to consolidate its authority by targeting Palestinians accused of being “lawbreakers” or collaborators with Israel.

That campaign soon morphed into a brutal crackdown. Social media videos circulated widely — and verified by independent observers — showing Hamas gunmen beating civilians in the streets, staging summary executions, and parading alleged collaborators before firing squads. These scenes, according to The Algemeiner report, sparked widespread fear but also ignited fierce resistance among clans, militias, and armed networks that had grown disillusioned with Hamas’s rule.

The result has been a patchwork of armed enclaves inside Gaza, where Hamas’s authority is increasingly contested. In areas vacated by Hamas fighters during earlier phases of the war, rival groups have moved to fill the vacuum — sometimes with tacit Israeli backing, sometimes through local tribal alliances.

Following Abu Shabab’s death, that resistance has coalesced further. Hossam al-Astal, commander of the Counter Terrorism Strike Force based in Khan Younis, announced that his faction would formally align with the Popular Forces. “Our project, new Gaza … will move ahead,” al-Astal told Reuters.

This alliance did not materialize overnight. In late October, al-Astal told The Algemeiner that his group and three allied militias — including Abu Shabab’s — had already been coordinating operations to secure territory abandoned by Hamas. At the time, he described an emerging bloc of Israel-backed Palestinian militias intent on preventing Hamas from reclaiming full control.

Crucially, al-Astal emphasized that these groups envisioned cooperation with most international actors involved in Gaza’s eventual reconstruction — but not with Qatar, Turkey, or Iran, all longtime sponsors of Hamas. This rejection, reported by The Algemeiner calls attention to how Gaza’s internal conflict is increasingly entangled with regional rivalries.

Hamas has responded by doubling down. Spokesman Hazem Qassem told Reuters that the group would continue hunting down collaborators “until this phenomenon is eradicated.” He claimed rival militias were shielded by Israeli forces in areas under IDF control, complicating Hamas’s internal security operations.

The rhetoric reflects Hamas’s strategic dilemma. While it retains control over roughly 47 percent of Gaza — where most of the population is concentrated — it has lost effective authority over large swaths of territory now controlled by Israel or contested by rival groups. Hamas’s reliance on coercion has further alienated civilians already exhausted by war, displacement, and economic collapse.

This internal turmoil is unfolding as Hamas faces mounting international pressure to disarm under President Trump’s US-backed peace plan. Israel has remained unequivocal, declaring that Hamas “will be disarmed” and that Gaza must be demilitarized as a precondition for any lasting political arrangement.

Yet Hamas leaders have rejected full disarmament outright. Senior figure Khaled Mashal told Qatar-based Al Jazeera that while the group might accept a temporary “freeze” or storage of weapons, surrendering its arsenal is “unacceptable to the resistance.” According to the information provided in The Algemeiner report, Mashal framed the proposal as a confidence-building measure designed to prevent renewed fighting, rather than a step toward dismantling Hamas’s military wing.

Instead, Hamas has floated a proposal for a long-term truce — potentially lasting a decade — contingent on Israel’s complete withdrawal from Gaza and an end to what Hamas calls an “extermination campaign.” Palestinian media outlets quoted Hamas officials saying the group would prevent attacks on Israel during such a truce while demanding extensive reconstruction aid.

Israel has rejected these overtures. “There will be no future for Hamas,” an Israeli government official told AFP. “The terror group will be disarmed, and Gaza will be demilitarized.”

Under phase one of Trump’s 20-point peace plan, Hamas was required to release all remaining hostages abducted during the Oct. 7, 2023 massacre in southern Israel — both living and deceased. In exchange, Israel released thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including many serving life sentences, and partially withdrew its forces to a newly established “Yellow Line” dividing Gaza east to west.

As The Algemeiner reported, Israel currently controls approximately 53 percent of Gaza’s territory, while Hamas exerts authority — contested and increasingly violent — over the remaining 47 percent. Phase two of the plan envisions the creation of an interim technocratic administration, the deployment of an International Stabilization Force (ISF), and the gradual demilitarization of Hamas.

But implementing that vision has proven fraught. Turkey has pressed aggressively to join the ISF and play a role in postwar Gaza, a move analysts warn could entrench Hamas’s infrastructure rather than dismantle it. Israel has consistently opposed any Turkish security presence, viewing Ankara’s involvement as a strategic threat — a disagreement that has reportedly created tension with Washington, which appears more receptive to Turkey’s ambitions.

Against this backdrop, the rise of anti-Hamas militias presents both opportunity and danger. On one hand, these groups challenge Hamas’s monopoly on power and offer a glimpse of an alternative political order — one that could potentially cooperate with international reconstruction efforts. On the other, Gaza risks descending into a multi-front internal war, with rival armed groups battling for dominance amid civilian suffering.

As The Algemeiner report noted, the killing of Abu Shabab has not extinguished the movement he helped build. Instead, it has revealed a Gaza increasingly fractured — not only between Hamas and Israel, but among Palestinians themselves. Dahini’s pledge to continue the fight, al-Astal’s declaration of unity, and Hamas’s escalating repression all point toward a protracted internal struggle that will shape Gaza’s fate long after the guns fall silent between Israel and Hamas.

Whether these rival forces can coalesce into a viable alternative governance structure remains uncertain. But one conclusion is increasingly clear: Hamas’s grip on Gaza, once near-absolute, is now under unprecedented strain. And as The Algemeiner has documented, the outcome of this internal Palestinian conflict may ultimately prove as decisive for Gaza’s future as any international peace plan drafted beyond its borders.