Hamas embraces Iran, but wary of causing rupture in ties with Cairo
GAZA CITY: Hamas announced that relations with Iran, severely affected by the Syrian crisis since 2012, have been restored. A highranking Hamas delegation has visited Tehran and met top leaders but not the Iranian president.
The first step for Hamas leaders after inking an Egyptianbrokered agreement to advance inter-Palestinian rapprochement is to set a clear limit on the scope of reconciliation: Handing over daily governance of the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian Authority.
In a television interview from Tehran Saturday night, Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas leader who participated in the visit, drew a clear distinction between its reconciliation with Fatah and Hamas’ policy regarding Israel.
“Support of the resistance is one thing and Palestinian reconciliation is another, related to the civil side in the Palestinian sphere.”
In other words, the reconciliation covers only Palestinian internal matters.
Relations between Hamas and Tehran began to deteriorate in 2012 after the wave of Arab Spring revolutions reached Syria, which is Iran’s main ally in the Middle East. A public row emerged when the former head of Hamas’ political bureau, Khaled Meshaal, left Damascus, where he had been residing for years, after he refused to support the Syrian regime’s and Iran’s position on the “Syrian revolution.”
Hamas’ decision to return to the bosom of Iran may have been its only option in light of its worsening financial crisis and need for military support.
Through this support, Hamas intends to counter Israel’s persistent search for tunnels along the Gaza border, aimed at harming the strategic military capability that Hamas has grown to rely on in confronting Israeli forces.
Hamas thinks it can have it both ways. “We are interested in strengthening our relations with any country and party that offers help and support to our people in facing the Israeli occupation in all its forms — whether by supporting reconciliation in internal Palestinian affairs or supporting us in resisting the occupation,” Hamas deputy political chief Salah Arouri said in Tehran.
Choice of resistance
He added: “We are here in Iran to affirm our adherence to the choice of resistance in the face of the occupation and the Zionist project, and our adherence to all of our relations that support the choice of resistance in the face of the occupation — until its removal.”
The delegation met Iranian Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secreatry Adm. Ali Shamkhani, and senior adviser Ali Akbar Velayati, according to the Hamas statement.
Hamas’ leaders are brazenly defying Israel, which has said that the group must be disarmed. At the same time, Hamas is calculating that its alliance with Iran will not cause a rupture with Cairo.
“Hamas seems ready to go anywhere with relations with Arab countries, and Iran was the one of the available destinations, as they are not putting all of their eggs in one country basket, even if it was Egypt,” Talal Okal, political analyst in Gaza, told Arab News.
He added: “For Hamas, Iranian support is vital to the viability of the Qassam Brigades (armed wing of Hamas). And unlike other countries that press them to abandon armed struggle, Iran embraces it.”
For Iran, Hamas enables it to show support for the Palestinian cause and to confront Israel, both key principles of the Iranian regime.
In the face of the tough posture it faces from US President Donald Trump, Tehran is anxious to demonstrate its influence on the most resonant issue in the region.
Different strategies Meanwhile, Abbas’ strategy is based on the hope of US-sponsored negotiations toward a two-state solution with Israel, and Hamas is focused on armed struggle in alliance with Iran.
Taher Nounou, Haniya’s adviser in Gaza, told Arab News: “HamasIran relations is a very sensitive issue.”
Although the ties between the two were weakened by the war in Syria, “we kept some channels open,” he said.
“Recently Iran realized that Hamas was not against Iran or the Syrian regime. They understood that we wanted to be neutral. It was a misunderstanding.”