The Gaza Strip, already devastated by months of war and humanitarian collapse, is now facing another perilous conflict — not with Israel, but within its own borders. The militant group Hamas, which has long ruled Gaza with an iron grip, is now clashing with powerful armed clans and militias vying for control in the chaotic post-war landscape. As external powers pressure Hamas to disarm, the group’s refusal to relinquish its weapons has ignited fierce internal battles that threaten to shatter the fragile ceasefire and further destabilize the enclave.
A New Phase of Chaos
In recent weeks, heavy gunfire and street battles have broken out across parts of Gaza City and Khan Younis, pitting Hamas’ internal security forces against well-armed local clans. These groups — some with decades-old rivalries, others formed during the recent war — have become emboldened by the power vacuum left after Israel’s partial withdrawal and the collapse of civil institutions.
Hamas, determined to reassert control, has redeployed its police and armed brigades to restore what it calls “law and order.” Reports from international outlets such as AP News and The Guardian describe scenes of militants sweeping through neighborhoods, detaining suspected rivals, and executing alleged collaborators.
For Hamas, these operations are a means to “stabilize” Gaza and prevent fragmentation. But for many residents, they signal the return of fear and repression. Local clans accuse Hamas of using “security” as a pretext for eliminating dissent and consolidating its rule.
Who Are the Gaza Clans?
The armed clans now challenging Hamas are not a unified movement but a loose network of family-based militias, political dissidents, and former security operatives. Some of these clans, such as the Doghmush family, have long histories of conflict with Hamas, stretching back to the early 2000s.
The Doghmush clan — among Gaza’s most notorious — has emerged as the focal point of this internal struggle. In October 2025, heavy fighting between Hamas and Doghmush fighters erupted in Gaza City, leaving dozens dead. Hamas accused the clan of collaborating with Israel, while clan leaders denounced the militant group’s “dictatorial tactics.”
Other clans are believed to be exploiting the chaos for profit and power. Control over aid convoys, smuggling routes, and local territories has become a lucrative and strategic objective. Some reports suggest that Israel may even be tolerating or quietly supporting certain clans as a way to weaken Hamas’ authority — a claim Israeli officials deny, but one that has fueled suspicions across Gaza.
Hamas’ Defiance: “We Will Not Disarm”
Even as internal violence grows, Hamas remains resolute on one point: it will not lay down its arms.
A senior Hamas source told The Times of India that disarmament is “out of the question,” and that the group will not participate in any post-war governance arrangement that requires it to give up weapons. Hamas views its arsenal not merely as a means of warfare but as a core element of its identity — the “weapon of resistance” against Israel and occupation.
External actors, including the United States and Israel, have floated the idea of forcibly disarming Hamas should diplomacy fail. Former U.S. President Donald Trump even warned that if Hamas “doesn’t disarm, we will disarm them — perhaps violently.” Yet, the feasibility of such an operation is highly uncertain; Gaza remains a densely populated maze of ruins, tunnels, and armed factions. Any attempt to enforce disarmament could ignite a new round of war.
Gaza’s Institutional Collapse
Beyond the politics and ideology lies a stark humanitarian and structural reality: Gaza is unraveling.
Hospitals barely function. Aid deliveries are inconsistent. Civil administration has collapsed. In this vacuum, power is increasingly dictated by those who can wield a gun.
What was once a centralized militant government under Hamas is now fragmenting into a patchwork of factions, gangs, and clans — each claiming authority in its own territory. According to analysts, this fragmentation mirrors the societal breakdown that has gripped Gaza since the war began, where trust in any governing institution — whether Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, or foreign mediators — has evaporated.
Implications for the Region
The internal fighting in Gaza has far-reaching consequences that go beyond its borders.
- A Fragile Ceasefire at Risk:
The ongoing clashes threaten to unravel the tentative calm between Israel and Hamas. If chaos spreads, Israel could intervene militarily once again, citing “security concerns.” - The Battle for Legitimacy:
Hamas’ control depends on its ability to project strength. Surrendering arms or losing dominance to clans would erode its authority. Conversely, the rise of clan militias could signal the emergence of new power centers within Palestinian society — less ideological, more pragmatic, but also potentially more violent. - The Humanitarian Toll:
For ordinary Gazans, this internal war compounds an already unbearable existence. Civilians are caught between armed factions, unable to access food, water, or medical care. Each gunfight, each raid, pushes Gaza further from recovery. - Diplomatic Stalemate:
International efforts to rebuild or re-govern Gaza hinge on who controls the ground. As long as Hamas refuses to disarm — and as long as rival militias continue to resist — no unified administration or reconstruction plan can take hold.
The Future: A State Within Ruins
Hamas’ defiance, coupled with the rise of independent armed groups, paints a grim picture of Gaza’s future. What was once framed as a war for “liberation” has devolved into an internal struggle for survival and dominance.
If current trends continue, Gaza could transform into a fragmented microstate ruled not by ideology or institutions, but by whoever controls the next street corner. The consequences for the broader Middle East — from Egypt and Israel to the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank — would be profound.
In the end, the most haunting reality is this: while the world debates disarmament and diplomacy, Gaza is bleeding from within, torn apart not by invasion, but by its own implosion.
About The Author
