Proxy Fire In Gaza: Could Israel's Arming Of Clans Ignite A New Civil Conflict?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has confirmed that his government is supplying weapons to clan-based groups inside Gaza in an attempt to undermine Hamas’s authority. The statement has provoked sharp domestic criticism, with the opposition accusing Netanyahu of arming “criminals and felons.” But beyond the immediate political fallout, the revelation raises a more serious question: is Israel lighting the fuse on a new civil conflict inside Gaza?

A Fragmented Landscape Beneath Hamas

Gaza is often viewed as a monolithic territory under Hamas rule, but beneath the surface lies a complex and often volatile patchwork of extended family clans, many of which predate modern Palestinian politics. These clans—some numbering in the thousands—operate as tightly knit social units with their own leadership structures, codes of conduct, and influence networks. While many maintain allegiance to Hamas or Fatah, others operate independently or shift loyalties based on shifting political or material incentives.

Historically, these clans have served various roles: as enforcers of social order, mediators of disputes, or as militia-like forces during periods of unrest. Their power is informal but deeply entrenched, making them both potential partners and potential spoilers for any political project in Gaza.

Israel’s Calculated Disruption

The logic behind arming these clans is clear from a tactical standpoint. By enabling alternative power centres to emerge, Israel seeks to fragment Hamas’s monopoly over governance and security. It is a classic divide-and-control strategy, aimed at eroding a hostile actor’s internal cohesion by fostering competing interests within its territory.

This tactic is not without precedent. Similar strategies have been used by other states in asymmetric warfare environments, from Iraq to Afghanistan. But the success of such efforts is mixed—and the unintended consequences often outlast the original threat.

A Powder Keg of Internal Rivalries

The immediate risks of this strategy are acute. Introducing weapons into Gaza’s fragmented clan network could trigger a wave of violent score-settling. Long-standing grievances between families—some dating back decades—could be reignited under the pretext of new political alignment.

Arms proliferation in a densely populated, already unstable environment risks creating a secondary layer of conflict, distinct from the Israel–Hamas confrontation. Civilians, already facing immense hardship due to airstrikes, siege conditions, and destroyed infrastructure, would now face a growing threat from within their own communities.

Criminal elements could also exploit the situation. In an environment where legal enforcement is inconsistent and clan loyalty often supersedes formal law, there is a real danger that Israeli-supplied weapons could fall into the hands of unaccountable militias.

Strategic Blowback

If this tactic does succeed in undermining Hamas’s grip, the outcome may not be peace but vacuum. Power vacuums in conflict zones rarely remain empty. Instead of a weakened but still functional governing authority, Gaza could descend into a landscape of competing armed groups, each with its own territorial base and foreign backers.

This would make any ceasefire or long-term settlement far more difficult. With no single actor able to enforce order or guarantee compliance, negotiation becomes fragmented and violence more unpredictable. It could also destabilise Egypt’s efforts to mediate between Israel and Palestinian factions, reducing the influence of regional stakeholders who have long sought to contain conflict spillover.

From a humanitarian perspective, the erosion of order within Gaza could spell catastrophe. Humanitarian aid routes would become more dangerous, civilian casualties would likely increase, and infrastructure repair efforts would be severely hampered.

Legal and Diplomatic Repercussions

International law forbids the transfer of arms to non-state actors in occupied or conflict zones without strict oversight. Arming unaffiliated clans—many with criminal or paramilitary histories—raises significant legal questions. It also places Israel’s allies, particularly in the West, in a difficult position.

Germany, for example, has continued to defend its military support for Israel amid growing scrutiny of the Gaza war. If the arming of internal Palestinian factions leads to widespread intra-communal violence, Israel’s Western partners could face increased diplomatic pressure to withdraw their support or reassess their policies.

Furthermore, there is a reputational cost. State-sanctioned arming of civilian groups can undermine Israel’s narrative of acting in self-defense and erode its claims to uphold a rules-based approach to warfare and occupation.

What Comes Next?

Three scenarios are emerging.

First, Israel’s strategy may temporarily disrupt Hamas’s control, allowing the IDF to conduct operations with reduced resistance. But this is likely to be short-lived if armed clans turn their weapons on each other or fail to act as coherent political entities.

Second, empowered clans could evolve into rival political-military structures, resisting both Hamas and Israeli influence. This would fragment Gaza further and shift the territory into a prolonged period of instability.

Third, Hamas may respond with a harsh internal crackdown. This would likely trigger armed resistance from clans, transforming a top-down conflict into a horizontal civil war—possibly the most destructive outcome of all.

Conclusion

Israel’s decision to arm clans inside Gaza marks a new and dangerous phase in the conflict. While the tactical aim of weakening Hamas is clear, the broader implications are volatile. History suggests that internal fragmentation rarely leads to stability—and often fuels new cycles of violence that are harder to control.

By turning Gaza’s internal fault lines into active fronts, Israel may succeed in weakening its primary enemy. But it may also unleash forces that neither it, nor Hamas, nor the international community will be able to contain.

The question is not whether this will undermine Hamas. The question is whether Gaza will survive what comes next.

Author: Ricardo Goulart