A Palestinian Voice Against Hamas: The Paradox of Condemning Your Own Side’s Violence

When a Palestinian intellectual publicly denounces Hamas’s October 7 attacks as “fascist terrorism” rather than resistance, it exposes deep fractures within Palestinian discourse about violence, legitimacy, and the path forward.

The Weight of Dissent

Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib’s characterization of the October 7 attacks represents a significant departure from mainstream Palestinian political narratives. As a Palestinian writer and political analyst, his explicit condemnation of Hamas’s actions as “sheer, horrific barbarism” rather than legitimate resistance carries particular weight. This perspective challenges the binary frameworks that often dominate Middle Eastern political discourse, where critics are expected to choose sides rather than acknowledge the complexities of violence and victimhood.

The October 7 attacks resulted in approximately 1,200 deaths and over 240 hostages taken, marking the deadliest day for Jewish people since the Holocaust. Alkhatib’s specific acknowledgment of the diverse victims—including Arabs, Muslims, Bedouins, Africans, and Thai workers—underscores how indiscriminate violence transcends the intended political messaging of its perpetrators. By naming these often-overlooked casualties, he highlights how terrorism’s victims rarely fit the neat categories that extremist ideologies try to impose.

Redefining Resistance

The distinction Alkhatib draws between “resistance” and “terrorism” touches on one of the most contentious debates in Palestinian politics. For decades, Palestinian factions have justified various forms of violence as legitimate resistance to occupation. However, Alkhatib’s rejection of this framing for October 7 suggests a growing recognition among some Palestinian intellectuals that certain tactics not only cross moral boundaries but also undermine Palestinian aspirations for statehood and international legitimacy.

This internal Palestinian critique emerges at a crucial moment. As the Gaza war continues with devastating humanitarian consequences, voices like Alkhatib’s complicate simplistic narratives on all sides. His position challenges those who reflexively defend all Palestinian actions as resistance while also confronting those who paint all Palestinians with the broad brush of extremism. This nuanced stance requires considerable courage, as Palestinian dissenters often face accusations of betrayal from their own communities while receiving little recognition from the other side.

The Future of Palestinian Advocacy

Alkhatib’s statement may signal an emerging strand of Palestinian political thought that seeks to reclaim the moral high ground through principled opposition to violence against civilians, regardless of the perpetrator. This approach could potentially reshape international perceptions of Palestinian politics, moving beyond the stale paradigms that have trapped the conflict in cycles of violence and retaliation. By condemning Hamas’s actions in unequivocal terms, such voices create space for a different kind of Palestinian advocacy—one that maintains criticism of occupation while rejecting terrorism as a tool of liberation.

The response to such positions within Palestinian society will likely determine whether this represents an isolated viewpoint or the beginning of a broader shift in Palestinian political discourse. The willingness of Palestinian intellectuals to publicly criticize their own side’s excesses, even while living under occupation or in exile, suggests a maturation of political thought that prioritizes universal human rights over tribal loyalties.

As the Middle East grapples with the aftermath of October 7 and its ongoing consequences, the question remains: Can voices like Alkhatib’s create enough moral clarity to chart a different path forward, or will they be drowned out by the louder drums of perpetual conflict?