During the Arab Summit convened in Baghdad, Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, made a pointed appeal for Hamas to relinquish its control over the Gaza Strip and called on all armed factions to surrender their weapons to his administration. Delivered in the presence of senior Arab leaders and diplomats, Abbas’s remarks crystallized the deep fissures within the Palestinian body politic and drew renewed international attention to the broader clash between order and terror in the Middle East. The timing and content of Abbas’s call is significant, coming amid sustained regional upheaval triggered by the October 7, 2023 massacre executed by Hamas terrorists. That coordinated assault, the single deadliest antisemitic atrocity since the Holocaust, left more than 1,200 Israeli civilians dead and saw more than 240 people abducted, including women, children, and foreign nationals, according to Israeli government and independent international sources. Israeli officials presented extensive evidence of mass killings, sexual violence, torture, and hostage-taking, citing forensic documentation and survivor testimonies corroborated by multiple global media outlets. In response, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), under Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, launched a major military campaign—known as the Iron Swords War—against Hamas and affiliated Iranian-backed groups in Gaza and beyond.
Abbas’s statement addressed not only the immediate struggle for control in Gaza but also resonated with the broader regional conflict shaped by Iranian interference. Since its 2007 violent takeover, Hamas has governed Gaza through authoritarian means, forcibly ousting the Palestinian Authority and imposing an Islamist regime that criminalizes dissent, restricts basic freedoms, and directs vast resources toward armament with Iranian backing. Reports from the United Nations, Western intelligence agencies, and leading human rights organizations have repeatedly highlighted Hamas’s diversion of humanitarian aid and use of civilian infrastructure for military purposes—including building tunnels, storing weapons near hospitals and schools, and conducting military operations from densely populated areas. Israeli and U.S. officials routinely cite these tactics as flagrant violations of international law and attribute them to increased civilian suffering during conflict cycles.
The split between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority is long-standing, with multiple reconciliation attempts brokered by Egypt, Qatar, and the United Nations ending in stalemate. The Palestinian Authority, headquartered in Ramallah and recognized internationally as the representative of Gaza and the West Bank, in practice governs only parts of Judea and Samaria. Its authority in Gaza is non-existent, with Hamas actively suppressing rival factions, including the Fatah movement once led within the territory by Abbas’s allies. Western governments, led by the United States and European Union, have conditioned economic and diplomatic support on the disarmament of terrorist groups, the renunciation of violence, and meaningful reforms toward transparent governance. They have repeatedly insisted that lasting peace and reconstruction in Gaza is impossible so long as Hamas remains armed and ideologically committed to the destruction of Israel.
In this context, Abbas’s summit intervention aligns with a mounting chorus of Arab and international voices demanding a post-Hamas future for Gaza, one in which central authority is restored, terrorism is dismantled, and institutions are rebuilt under a legitimate secular framework. Statements from the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Germany in recent months have reaffirmed Israel’s right to self-defense while underscoring the need for a political solution rooted in reformed Palestinian governance. Arab leaders, meanwhile, have grown increasingly impatient with both Hamas’s intransigence and the Palestinian Authority’s failure to establish clear authority or address corruption and lack of democratic accountability within its ranks. Egypt and Jordan have expressed grave concerns over the risk that ongoing violence could destabilize their own societies or invite further Iranian subversion through local proxies.
Iran’s overarching strategy in the region poses profound challenges for Israeli and Western interests alike. By funding, arming, and training Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and various Shiite militias in Syria and Iraq, the Islamic Republic seeks to orchestrate perpetual low-intensity conflict on Israel’s borders and undermine Western-aligned governments. U.S. and Israeli intelligence assessments, corroborated by German, British, and French security agencies, detail the scale of Iranian material support and strategic coordination, including rocket and drone attacks from Lebanon and Syria, logistical and communications aid through third-country networks, and influence operations targeting Arab populations. The October 7 attack is widely seen by Israeli officials and Western analysts as a culmination of this Iranian strategy, exploiting the international focus on other crises to unleash a campaign of mass terror intended to destabilize the region and trigger escalation.
Inside Gaza, Hamas’s rule is characterized by systematic human rights abuses, arbitrary detention, extrajudicial killings, and pervasive suppression of political opponents. Investigations by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and independent Palestinian civil society groups document routine violations of freedoms of speech, assembly, and the press under Hamas control, with the organization’s internal security forces accused of widespread torture and use of civilians as human shields. The pervasive collaboration with Iran and the diversion of resources from social services to arms procurement have generated profound hardship for ordinary Gaza residents, fostering a climate of fear and dependency. Meanwhile, Israel’s need to neutralize terrorist infrastructure has necessitated military operations that, despite efforts at precision targeting and humanitarian deconfliction, have led to significant civilian casualties, infrastructure damage, and mass displacement—outcomes for which Hamas’s deliberate militarization of civilian areas bears primary responsibility, according to IDF, U.S., and United Nations briefings.
As the conflict has intensified, the fate of Israeli hostages abducted on October 7 remains a central humanitarian and moral concern. Israeli authorities report that more than 120 hostages remain unaccounted for, their plight exacerbated by Hamas’s refusal to allow visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross or to provide proof of life, in direct defiance of international humanitarian law. Western governments and leading human rights organizations have condemned these actions as war crimes, reiterating the essential difference between innocent civilians held captive by terror groups and convicted terrorists periodically released in negotiated exchanges. The ongoing hostage crisis has hardened Israeli public and political opinion, reinforcing the conviction that only the total disarmament and removal of Hamas from Gaza can ensure future security and facilitate any meaningful process toward peace or reconstruction.
Abbas’s insistence on restoring Palestinian Authority control over Gaza has been met with derision and outright rejection by Hamas leaders, who maintain their commitment to “armed resistance” and continue to reject recognition of Israel or renunciation of violence. The internal Palestinian divide is deepened further by declining support for both leaderships, with polling by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research and other institutes showing record levels of public frustration and mistrust toward both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, especially among younger generations. The unity crisis raises critical questions for regional stakeholders, with Arab, Israeli, American, and European officials grappling with the prospect of a post-Hamas administration and the risk of anarchy or renewed extremism in the event of a sudden collapse in Gaza.
The Baghdad Arab Summit thus served as an arena for renewed diplomacy and public positioning around these core challenges. Western officials, including those from the United States and European Union, have welcomed Abbas’s call as a necessary precondition for demilitarization and eventual reconstruction. Yet many remain skeptical of the Palestinian Authority’s capacity and popular legitimacy, stressing the need for far-reaching reforms, external support, and robust security guarantees to prevent the re-emergence of terrorism and Iranian influence. Security experts and diplomats argue that only a coordinated international approach—combining firm military deterrence against terror groups with sustained efforts at institution-building and economic support—can lay the groundwork for a stable future.
Israel’s leadership, spearheaded by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Israel Katz, and IDF Chief Zamir, continues to stress the non-negotiable prerequisites of security, hostage release, and the eradication of terror infrastructure. There is broad political consensus in Jerusalem that disengagement from Gaza’s security affairs before these objectives are accomplished would invite further Iranian-sponsored attacks and betray the October 7 victims. This strategic calculus finds support among key Western allies, with officials in the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany repeatedly warning against premature moves that could see a resurgence of uncontrolled terrorism emanating from Gaza.
Ultimately, Abbas’s speech in Baghdad reflects both the acute crisis facing Palestinian governance and the wider dilemmas confronting the Middle East as it grapples with the legacy of the October 7 massacre and Iranian-backed aggression. The fate of Gaza, the future of Palestinian leadership, and the region’s prospects for peace and development depend on the willingness of international actors to enforce anti-terrorism norms, support legitimate governance, and sustain pressure on those who sponsor and organize terror. As the region’s only liberal democracy, Israel’s struggle for survival is emblematic of the West’s broader contest with violent extremism, requiring clarity of purpose, mobilization of resources, and unremitting defense of civilizational values. The international community now faces a pivotal test: whether it can move beyond rhetorical support and help realize a future in which Gaza is no longer a base for terror but instead governed by a legitimate, demilitarized authority serving the needs of its residents and the cause of regional stability.
