Hamas’ Executions of Traitors in Gaza Recent events in Gaza - the execution of collaborators by Hamas - have reignited fierce debate across global media and social platforms. In the wake of these acts, a familiar pattern has emerged: commentators aligned with hasbara narratives swiftly denounce Palestinians as “uncivilized,” directing moral outrage at Palestinian supporters for not condemning such executions with equal fervor. These accusations are not new - they are part of a broader strategy to delegitimize Palestinian resistance and divert attention from the disproportionate violence and systemic oppression inflicted upon Gaza and the wider Palestinian population. A Short History of Treason In every war throughout history, states have sought to recruit collaborators - individuals willing to betray their own side in exchange for money, power, or survival. From the French Resistance and Nazi informants in WWII, to U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and on to the Israeli occupation of Palestine, the logic remains the same: intelligence is a powerful weapon, and betrayal is its price. Gaza is no exception. Yet the reactions to so-called “traitors” in this context are filtered through a particularly toxic and hypocritical lens. A Remarkable Choice of Traitors After endless public messaging about “bringing the hostages home” and “not starving Gaza,” one might expect that Israel would have prioritized finding allies who could aid in hostage recovery. But the reality points to a different agenda. Israel supported a criminal gang, known as the “Popular Forces,” led by Yasser Abu Shabab. This group was responsible for the looting of aid convoys and reselling the food on Gaza’s black market at exorbitant prices. Everyone in and many beyond if Gaza knew that because Yasser Abu Shabab was disowned and expelled by his own Bedouin tribe, which declared him and his gang outlaws. This reveals a core contradiction in the hasbara narrative - proclaiming to care about the hostages and denying the use of starvation as a weapon - while simultaneously propping up criminal collaborators whose main achievement was to steal food from their own people. Treason and Punishment Every state, regardless of ideology or geography, treats treason as one of the gravest possible crimes. In wartime, the betrayal of one’s people can have fatal consequences - not only for armies and governments, but for civilians whose lives depend on the fragile cohesion of their society. For this reason, nearly every country’s criminal and military law prescribes the harshest penalties for traitors, often including life imprisonment or execution. History is replete with examples. From Europe’s treatment of Nazi collaborators after World War II to the execution of spies during the Cold War, governments have always defended the sanctity of loyalty with severe punishment. Even among states that have moved away from capital punishment, treason continues to occupy a singular place in the hierarchy of crimes - often remaining one of the last offenses still eligible for the death penalty. In the United States, federal law still allows execution for treason. In India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, treason and related “waging war against the state” offenses remain capital crimes. The same applies in countries like China, North Korea, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, where the death penalty is regularly imposed for political or espionage-related charges. Even in Singapore and Malaysia, treason can legally carry a death sentence. Many governments around the world still maintain that betraying one’s country is an offense so severe that it can justify the ultimate punishment. And yet, when Palestinians punish collaborators - individuals accused of preventing humanitarian aid from reaching the starving population - they are portrayed not as a people defending themselves, but as lawless mobs acting out of barbarism. The same observers who would support or accept the harsh punishment of a traitor in their own countries express moral outrage when Palestinians act to protect their own. Martial Law and Hypocrisy Some hasbara propagandists now say that the alleged collaborators in Gaza should have been given a fair trial. It’s a convenient talking point, especially for those eager to paint Palestinians as uncivilized for reacting to betrayal in the middle of a war. But it willfully ignores the reality on the ground: there is no functioning judicial system in Gaza anymore. After Israel’s campaign of destruction, there are no courthouses, no jail cells, and very likely no surviving judges or prosecutors. Entire neighborhoods have been flattened. Ministries, police stations, courts - all gone. The institutions that would normally handle criminal investigations and legal proceedings have been bombed into dust. In such conditions, to demand a trial in a courthouse is not only unrealistic - it’s disingenuous. That’s precisely why martial law exists: it’s a legal framework designed to operate when civil infrastructure is no longer functional. Martial law isn’t a loophole - it’s the system of last resort when society is in collapse. And even martial law, when properly applied, does include provisions for due process, albeit in a stripped-down, military form. It may not look like a televised courtroom with lawyers in suits, but it is still intended to follow basic rules of justice - especially when time, security, and the survival of the community are all at stake. Now contrast that with the blatant hypocrisy of the Israeli system. Israel has routinely used military law against Palestinians for decades, not because it has no functioning courts, but because military law gives the state more power and fewer limits. Children are dragged into military tribunals. Detainees are held for months without trial. Convictions are handed down without evidence made public. The Israeli use of martial law isn’t about necessity - it’s about domination and control. So when critics suddenly discover a passion for “due process” in Gaza, ask yourself: where was that concern when Israel imposed martial law on civilians in the West Bank? Where is it when Israel bulldozes Palestinian homes without trial? When administrative detention is used to jail people indefinitely with no charge? When children are interrogated without a lawyer present? This isn’t about justice. It’s about performative outrage - using the language of law and human rights not to protect the vulnerable, but to smear those already under siege. Abandoned on Purpose Those who choose to collaborate with an enemy typically demand protection or evacuation when the war ends. It is an unspoken rule of espionage: those who betray must be bought - not just with money, but with promises of rescue. The agents who risk their lives inside hostile territory rarely act from loyalty; they act from fear, desperation, or opportunism. And they almost always expect their handlers to ensure their safety when the fighting stops. In Gaza, it remains unclear whether Yasser Abu Shabab and his “Popular Forces” gang were ever offered such guarantees by Israel. What seems increasingly likely, however, is that Israel did not live up to its word - or that no genuine arrangement ever existed. Reports from the ground indicate that when the ceasefire took effect, these collaborators were left exposed, without extraction or protection, facing the wrath of the very society they had exploited. This would not be the first time a powerful state has abandoned its local proxies once their usefulness expired. The same pattern played out in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam, where interpreters, informants, and militias who served foreign armies were later left behind, often hunted by their own communities as traitors. For the occupier, such individuals are tools of convenience - valuable during the campaign, expendable when the objective shifts. Disposable Assets, Useful Deaths If Israel had wanted, it could have arranged extractions or offered them sanctuary, but in this case, it appears that the value of these individuals was greater in death than in life. Their executions became useful - not militarily, but narratively. By letting collaborators fall into the hands of Hamas or local militias, Israel ensured that these men would face the kind of swift, public punishment that could then be broadcast as evidence of Palestinian savagery. Hasbara agents and media outlets seized the opportunity: graphic images and videos were shared, moral outrage manufactured, and a question loudly asked - “Why aren’t Palestinian supporters condemning this?”. This was not just abandonment. It was propagandistic sacrifice. The strategy follows a familiar logic: present Palestinians as irrational, violent, and inherently incapable of upholding “civilized” values like fair trials and human rights. It allows Israel to posture as the more moral side - even while engaging in collective punishment, starvation sieges, and the systematic destruction of Gaza’s infrastructure. In this narrative, the collaborator is not a person. He is a prop, a pawn, and finally, a martyr for a media war in which the enemy’s brutality must always be on full display. His life is expendable. His death is political capital. What makes this tactic especially effective is that it inverts the roles of victim and villain. Rather than being held accountable for creating the conditions that give rise to treason, internal chaos, and desperation, Israel can point to the inevitable consequences of betrayal as proof that Palestinian society is beyond redemption. Psychological Operations in Plain Sight This is not mere speculation. Governments have long used psychological operations (psyops) to manipulate public perception through controlled leaks, selective abandonment, and narrative exploitation. From the CIA to the Mossad, intelligence agencies understand that warfare is no longer just fought on the ground - it is waged in the mind, on screens, and through headlines. Letting collaborators die - and making sure their deaths are visible - serves multiple purposes: - Intimidation: It sends a message to others in Gaza considering collaboration - you’re on your own. - Delegitimization: It allows Israel to depict Palestinian resistance as brutal and lawless. - Distraction: It shifts focus away from Israeli war crimes by manufacturing a controversy Palestinians must defend themselves against. - Division: It seeds mistrust within Palestinian society, encouraging the belief that no one is safe, even among their own. Selective Outrage in Western Media If you were to follow mainstream international media coverage of the war on Gaza, you might think the most urgent human rights concern was the execution of a handful of alleged collaborators. These cases - broadcast with dramatic footage, heavily editorialized headlines, and stern moralizing - have dominated segments on Western news networks, flooded social media, and fueled endless debates about the supposed “barbarity” of Palestinian society. Meanwhile, the mass death of Palestinians - over 67,600 killed by Israeli forces in the past two years alone - is reported with a kind of bureaucratic detachment. If mentioned at all, it appears as a statistic buried beneath headlines about Israeli hostages, military operations, or “Hamas infrastructure.” This disparity is not just editorial negligence - it is narrative engineering. Why does the execution of 6, 10, or even 20 collaborators generate more headlines than tens of thousands of civilian deaths? The answer lies in how international media has been conditioned to humanize Israeli suffering and criminalize Palestinian resistance, while rendering Palestinian death either suspicious, incidental, or regrettably “inevitable.” The death of a Palestinian by an Israeli missile strike is reported like a weather event - tragic, but impersonal. The execution of a collaborator by Palestinians, however, is moral theater: a chance for anchors, pundits, and politicians to question the very humanity of an entire people. This is not an accident. It is the result of decades of dehumanization, racism, and Western media’s alignment - ideological, financial, and political - with Israeli narratives. The imbalance in coverage is not about what’s newsworthy; it’s about what serves the dominant power structure. Sensationalizing the Exception, Erasing the Norm Executions are troubling and they deserve scrutiny. But in Gaza, they are the exception, not the rule. Israeli airstrikes, however, are routine, often described as “precision attacks” even when they obliterate entire neighborhoods. These strikes have killed thousands of children, flattened hospitals, and starved a population into mass displacement. Yet somehow, the brutality of industrialized, state-sanctioned killing garners less emotional coverage than the parading of a suspected traitor through a war-torn street. Why? Because the collaborator narrative serves a purpose: it confirms the West’s deep-seated biases. It tells a comforting story where Palestinians are the problem, even in their own suffering. Where Hamas - and by extension, all Palestinians - are irrational, vengeful, and undeserving of the empathy extended to victims elsewhere. This is not journalism - it’s ideological maintenance. Epilogue Over the past two years, the story has been told through the lens of the occupier, not the occupied. We have watched as collaborators - tools of an outside force - were elevated to center stage while the children buried in mass graves were made invisible. We have heard the word “civilized” wielded not as a standard for behavior, but as a badge of racial and political superiority. We have seen calls for justice twisted into instruments of propaganda - not to protect the vulnerable, but to deepen their dehumanization. The hasbara narrative depends on this inversion. It thrives on confusion - on the belief that the colonized must always justify their pain, their anger, and even their existence. When collaborators are executed, it is savagery; when Gaza is bombed, it is security. When Palestinians resist, it is terrorism; when they die quietly, it is peace. The moral order that condemns the powerless for surviving while excusing the powerful for killing is not a moral order at all - it is a script written by empire, performed by media, and consumed by those too numb to see their own reflection in the ruins. The executions of collaborators are a symptom of collapse - of a world in which law and order have been bombed into dust. They are not proof of Palestinian savagery, but of the savagery imposed upon Palestine. References - Associated Press. “Hamas Executes More Than Two Dozen Alleged Collaborators in Gaza.” AP News, 14 Oct. 2025. - Le Monde. “Israel’s Covert Support for Armed ‘Popular Forces’ in Gaza Backfires.” Le Monde International Edition, 10 Oct. 2025. - Reuters. “Gaza Clan Disowns Yasser Abu Shabab amid Looting, Collaboration Allegations.” Reuters, 11 Oct. 2025. - The Week (UK). “Who Are the ‘Popular Forces’? Inside the Collapse of Israel’s Proxy in Gaza.” The Week, 12 Oct. 2025. - United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Humanitarian Impact Situation Report #59: Gaza Strip Infrastructure and Governance Damage Assessment. 3 Oct. 2025. - UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR). “Destruction of Gaza’s Civil Institutions and Judiciary.” Press release, 25 Sept. 2025. - U.S. Code Title 18 § 2381 – Treason. United States Government Publishing Office, current through 2024. - B’Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. Minors in Military Detention: Israeli Military Courts in the West Bank, 2024 update. - Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association. Administrative Detention Statistics and Legal Brief, May 2025. - United Nations Human Rights Council. Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Including East Jerusalem, and Israel, A/HRC/59/73, June 2025. - Associated Press. “Gaza Health Ministry: Death Toll Rises to 67,600.” AP News, 14 Oct. 2025. - Haaretz. “Israeli Military Admits Use of Local Gaza Militias to Gather Intelligence.” Haaretz English Edition, 9 Oct. 2025. - International Crisis Group. After the Ceasefire: Fragmentation and Retribution in Gaza, Report No. 248, Oct. 2025. - Al Jazeera English. “Hamas Says It Warned Collaborators Before Executions; Israel Denounces Killings.” Al Jazeera, 15 Oct. 2025. - Human Rights Watch. Israel/Palestine: End Collective Punishment in Gaza. 1 Oct. 2025. - Reporters Without Borders. Media Narratives and War Coverage: Gaza 2025, Oct. 2025.