Cash-strapped Hamas too broke to pay fighters as Israel cracks down: report

New York Post - Apr 18th, 2025

Hamas is reportedly facing significant financial difficulties due to ongoing Israeli military actions, which have cut off the group's funding and resources. This has resulted in many senior Hamas fighters and political staff receiving only half of their usual pay of $200 to $300 a month. Additionally, salaries for many Hamas and Gaza government workers have stopped altogether. The financial strain has made it increasingly difficult for Hamas to recruit new fighters. This situation follows Israel's decision to halt humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, which Hamas had been exploiting for funds by seizing goods and imposing taxes and customs duties.

Hamas' financial woes are compounded by their rejection of Israel's latest ceasefire proposal, which they argue does not meet their demands. Israel has conditioned any ceasefire on the release of hostages and the disarmament of Hamas. The group currently holds 59 hostages and demands a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the release of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for their release. The ongoing conflict and resultant financial crisis highlight the complex geopolitical tensions in the region and the humanitarian impact on Gaza’s civilian population.

Israel Hamas Ceasefire Negotiations Humanitarian Aid Hostage Situation Financial Crisis Gaza Strip Khalil Al Hayya Moumen Al Natour

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.8

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a well-rounded overview of Hamas's financial difficulties amid the ongoing conflict with Israel. It draws from credible sources and presents information in a clear and accessible manner. While the narrative is predominantly from an Israeli perspective, it includes some Palestinian viewpoints to offer balance. The article is timely and relevant, addressing issues of significant public interest. However, it could benefit from greater transparency in source attribution and a more diverse range of perspectives to fully capture the complexities of the situation. Overall, the article is a valuable contribution to the discourse on Middle Eastern geopolitics, with potential to engage and inform a wide audience.

Accuracy

The story accurately reports on Hamas's financial difficulties, citing credible sources such as the Wall Street Journal and intelligence officials. The claims about Hamas's inability to pay its fighters and the reduction in salaries are well-supported by multiple sources. However, specific details like the exact number of hostages held by Hamas and the conditions of the ceasefire negotiations could benefit from additional corroboration. Overall, the article aligns closely with verified reports, though some claims would benefit from more explicit verification.

Balance

The article presents a predominantly Israeli perspective, focusing on the impact of Israeli actions on Hamas. While it includes statements from Hamas representatives, the narrative largely centers on Israeli strategies and their consequences. The inclusion of quotes from a Palestinian lawyer provides some balance, but the article could further benefit from a more diverse range of Palestinian voices to fully represent the complexities of the situation.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and employs clear, concise language. The narrative flows logically from one point to the next, making it easy for readers to follow the developments. However, some complex geopolitical terms and references could be better explained for readers unfamiliar with the context. Overall, the article maintains a neutral tone and presents information in a straightforward manner.

Source quality

The article draws from high-quality sources, including the Wall Street Journal and intelligence officials from multiple countries. These sources are credible and authoritative, lending significant weight to the claims made. The use of direct quotes from officials and experts further enhances the reliability of the information presented. However, the article could improve by providing more detailed attribution for some claims, such as the specific officials or agencies involved.

Transparency

The article provides a clear basis for its claims, citing specific sources and including direct quotes. However, it lacks detailed explanations of the methodology behind the intelligence assessments or the specific criteria used to evaluate the financial status of Hamas. More transparency regarding the sources of information and their potential biases would strengthen the article's credibility.