Hamas’s military tactics differed significantly from those of Fatah in several key ways:

1. Ideological foundation: Hamas was founded as an Islamist organization rooted in the Muslim Brotherhood, while Fatah was a secular nationalist group. This ideological difference influenced their approach to resistance and military tactics.

2. Evolution of tactics:

• Fatah initially focused on guerrilla warfare and low-intensity conflict, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s. They carried out cross-border raids, hijackings, and attacks on Israeli targets in Europe and the Middle East.

• Hamas, emerging later in 1987, initially focused on social services and religious education alongside militant activities. They gradually developed more sophisticated military capabilities, including rocket attacks, tunnel warfare, and eventually conventional military-style operations.

3. Use of suicide bombings: Hamas began employing suicide bombings as a tactic in 1993, whereas Fatah had not typically used this method in its earlier operations.

4. Rocket attacks: Hamas developed a significant focus on rocket and mortar attacks against Israel, particularly after taking control of Gaza in 2007. This became a hallmark of their military strategy.

5. Tunnel warfare: Hamas invested heavily in developing an extensive network of tunnels for both smuggling and military purposes, which became a crucial part of their tactics. This was not a significant feature of Fatah’s approach.

6. Conventional military capabilities: Over time, Hamas developed more conventional military-style units and tactics, culminating in the complex, coordinated attack on October 7, 2023. This level of conventional military capability was not characteristic of Fatah’s historical operations.

7. Hostage-taking: While both groups engaged in kidnapping, Hamas has used large-scale hostage-taking as a strategic tool, as seen in the October 2023 attack.

8. International support: Fatah received support from various Arab states and the Soviet bloc, while Hamas has received significant support and training from Iran and Hezbollah.

9. Adaptation to changing circumstances: Fatah shifted towards diplomatic efforts and a two-state solution in the late 1980s, while Hamas maintained a more hardline stance against Israel’s existence.

These differences reflect the distinct origins, ideologies, and historical contexts of the two organizations, as well as their evolution over time in response to changing political and military circumstances.