On Saturday, residents of Deir al-Balah in Gaza are set to vote for a new local leader for the first time in two decades. However, experts express concern that this election could actually benefit Hamas, especially since the group is unwilling to comply with disarmament terms tied to any ceasefire.
Jonathan Schanzer, from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, remarked that holding elections under unstable conditions could lead to Hamas’s victory once again. He reflected on how the 2006 elections, supported by the Bush administration, ultimately empowered Hamas and spiraled into conflict and civil war.
He emphasized the need for caution when organizing elections in Gaza, given Hamas’s solid grip on the region and its status as an accepted political entity.
In Gaza, journalists are still being posthumously identified as members of terrorist groups, complicating the distinction between combatants and civilians.
Four political parties are competing in Deir al-Balah, but worries persist that one of them, the Deir al-Balah Unity Party, is closely linked to Hamas. Notably, several candidates have been seen with Hamas officials.
Ahmed Fuad Al-Khatib, a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council, criticized the timing of the elections. He pointed out that Gazans face daily risks, including arrest and violence, for expressing anti-Hamas sentiments. He argued that proceeding with the elections would obstruct crucial transitional efforts by the peace committee, which aims to disarm Hamas as a necessary first step.
Schanzer further stated that the disarmament of Hamas, a key objective of Donald Trump’s ceasefire plan, remains largely unfulfilled. Reports indicate that Hamas has increased its hold on Gaza, including taxing locals and establishing educational frameworks.
Schanzer cast doubt on the feasibility of Hamas giving up its weapons, suggesting that any proposal might involve only partial disarmament. Recent statements from Hamas leaders hinted at surrendering a portion of weapons from security forces, but it remained unclear whether military arms would be included.
He also disputed the notion that Hamas’s political and military factions operate independently, describing such ideas as unrealistic. Schanzer argued that undermining Iran’s support is critical for reducing Hamas’s influence, as their reliance on Iranian backing is substantial.
He added that a significant loss of Iranian support could deeply impact Hamas’s operational capabilities.
Finally, while Israel controls approximately 53% of the Gaza Strip with Hamas governing the remaining territory, Schanzer noted a gradual decline in Hamas’s control. Yet he cautioned that differing timelines among the U.S., Israel, and their adversaries complicate the situation.
The Trump administration reportedly did not comment on whether limited disarmament would be sufficient to meet ceasefire conditions or if they would consider delaying the elections until stability is restored in Gaza.
