OCR Specification focus:
‘Hezbollah, Hamas and Al Qaeda shaped non-state conflict and ideology across the region.’
Non-state actors such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al Qaeda transformed Middle Eastern politics and conflict, challenging states and reshaping ideology through armed struggle, resistance, and transnational jihad.
Hezbollah: Shi‘a Resistance and Political Power
Origins and Ideology
Hezbollah emerged during the Lebanese Civil War (1975–1990) and the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. It was formed by Shi‘a clerics inspired by Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic Revolution in Iran (1979) and supported by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
Hezbollah: A Shi‘a Islamist political and militant organisation founded in Lebanon in 1982, combining armed resistance with political participation, closely aligned with Iran.
Hezbollah’s ideology is rooted in Wilayat al-Faqih (guardianship of the jurist), advocating governance under Islamic clerical authority. Its goals included:
Ending Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
Resisting Western and Israeli influence in the region.
Supporting oppressed Shi‘a populations and exporting the Islamic Revolution.
Armed Struggle and Resistance
Hezbollah gained prominence through guerrilla warfare and asymmetric tactics against Israeli and Western forces:
Attacks on Western targets in Beirut (1983), including the US Marine barracks bombing.
Persistent resistance against the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF), culminating in Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000.
Continued conflict with Israel, notably the 2006 Lebanon War, where Hezbollah’s rocket attacks and resilience enhanced its regional prestige.
Map of Hezbollah’s defensive system south of the Litani River in July 2006, showing bunkers, anti-tank positions, and firing points. It illustrates the group’s asymmetric defence strategies and layered positions during the 2006 war, highlighting how Hezbollah challenged conventional Israeli forces. Source
Hezbollah also built a sophisticated military infrastructure, including:
A vast rocket arsenal supplied by Iran and Syria.
Extensive underground networks and fortified positions in southern Lebanon.
Use of psychological warfare and media outlets like Al-Manar to influence public opinion.
Political Role and State Integration
From the 1990s, Hezbollah transitioned into a political actor:
Participated in Lebanese elections and gained seats in parliament.
Formed alliances with other sectarian groups, becoming part of Lebanon’s government.
Provided social services, education, and healthcare to Shi‘a communities, increasing grassroots support.
This dual role — as both militant organisation and political party — allowed Hezbollah to shape Lebanese politics while retaining its armed capacity, a model that challenged traditional state sovereignty.
Hamas: Palestinian Resistance and Governance
Origins and Ideological Foundations
Hamas was founded during the First Intifada in 1987 as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. It fused Palestinian nationalism with Islamism, rejecting Israel’s legitimacy and advocating for an Islamic state in historic Palestine.
Hamas: A Sunni Islamist Palestinian organisation founded in 1987, combining armed resistance against Israel with political activity, governing the Gaza Strip since 2007.
Key principles of Hamas’s 1988 Charter:
Palestine is an Islamic waqf (endowment) that cannot be surrendered.
Armed struggle (jihad) is the only path to liberation.
Opposition to peace processes viewed as legitimising Israel.
Military Strategy and Intifadas
Hamas’s military wing, the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, became central to Palestinian resistance:
Conducted suicide bombings and rocket attacks during the Second Intifada (2000–2005).
Used tunnels for infiltration and smuggling weapons into Gaza.
Employed asymmetric warfare against Israel, aiming to erode Israeli morale and demonstrate defiance.
Hamas also gained support through its social infrastructure, including:
Schools, hospitals, and charities in Gaza and the West Bank.
Community programmes that filled governance gaps left by the Palestinian Authority.
Political Power and Internal Conflict
Hamas entered Palestinian politics and won the 2006 legislative elections, defeating Fatah. Tensions with Fatah escalated into violent clashes, leading to:
Hamas’s seizure of Gaza in 2007, establishing de facto rule.
Division of Palestinian governance: Hamas in Gaza, Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
Despite international isolation, Israeli blockades, and repeated Israeli military operations (notably Operation Cast Lead 2008–09 and Operation Protective Edge 2014), Hamas retained control over Gaza and continued armed resistance, shaping the Palestinian struggle and influencing peace negotiations.
Al Qaeda: Transnational Jihadism and Global Conflict
Origins and Doctrine
Al Qaeda was formed in 1988 by Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri from veterans of the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union. It developed into a transnational Sunni jihadist network with ambitions beyond the Middle East.
Al Qaeda: A global Sunni Islamist militant organisation founded in 1988, advocating violent jihad to expel Western influence from Muslim lands and establish a pan-Islamic caliphate.
Its ideology centred on global jihad, rejecting secular Arab regimes, Western presence in Muslim lands, and the existence of Israel. Al Qaeda called for:
The overthrow of “apostate” governments in the Middle East.
Expulsion of US and Western forces from the Islamic world.
Support for global Muslim insurgencies.
Key Attacks and Strategy
Al Qaeda’s operational strategy involved spectacular terrorist attacks to project power and provoke Western overreach:
1998 US embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.
USS Cole bombing (2000).
11 September 2001 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 and triggered the US-led “War on Terror”.
These attacks reshaped global security and Middle Eastern geopolitics, leading to:
US invasion of Afghanistan (2001) to dismantle Al Qaeda’s base.
Iraq War (2003), which created conditions for jihadist resurgence.
Al Qaeda evolved into a decentralised network, inspiring affiliates such as:
Operational map of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) across North and West Africa, illustrating the spread of Al-Qaeda’s decentralised affiliates. The legend also notes US counterterrorism initiatives, providing broader context beyond the syllabus but clarifying how Al-Qaeda’s network extended beyond the Middle East. Source
Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) in Yemen.
Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), precursor to the Islamic State (IS).
Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) in North Africa.
Influence and Legacy
Though weakened by US counterterrorism efforts and the death of bin Laden in 2011, Al Qaeda’s ideological legacy endures. It continues to influence militant movements, destabilise fragile states, and shape Western and regional security policies.
Comparative Impact on the Middle East
Non-State Conflict and State Sovereignty
Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al Qaeda challenged state authority and altered conflict dynamics:
Hezbollah undermined Israeli military dominance and redefined Lebanese sovereignty.
Hamas transformed Palestinian resistance into a sustained armed and political movement.
Al Qaeda transcended borders, reframing conflict as a global struggle and influencing regional insurgencies.
Ideological Influence
These organisations also reshaped Islamist political thought:
Hezbollah combined Shi‘a revolutionary ideology with state integration.
Hamas blended Sunni Islamism with Palestinian nationalism.
Al Qaeda globalised jihad, inspiring militant movements worldwide.
Their rise illustrates the enduring power of non-state actors to shape the political, ideological, and military landscape of the Middle East.
FAQ
Iran played a crucial role in Hezbollah’s formation, providing funding, weapons, and training through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from 1982 onwards. This support enabled Hezbollah to evolve from a small militia into a sophisticated military and political force.
Iranian backing also shaped Hezbollah’s ideology, embedding the principle of Wilayat al-Faqih and aligning the group with Tehran’s regional objectives. Strategically, Iranian assistance allowed Hezbollah to develop extensive rocket arsenals, build fortified infrastructure, and sustain prolonged conflicts with Israel, notably in 2006.
Hamas built legitimacy not only through armed struggle but also by establishing a vast social welfare network. It provided education, healthcare, and financial support to impoverished Palestinian communities, particularly in Gaza.
This grassroots approach enhanced Hamas’s reputation as a defender of Palestinian society and helped it outmanoeuvre Fatah, whose governance was often seen as corrupt and ineffective. The organisation’s social services were vital to its electoral success in 2006 and its continued influence despite external pressure and blockades.
Earlier Islamist movements, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, focused primarily on reforming society and government within individual states. Al Qaeda, by contrast, promoted a transnational vision of global jihad.
Key differences included:
A focus on attacking the “far enemy” (Western powers) to weaken the “near enemy” (local regimes).
An emphasis on establishing a global caliphate rather than reforming existing states.
Advocacy of violence as a religious duty, contrasting with the Brotherhood’s preference for gradual societal change.
Hezbollah’s intervention in Syria from 2012 significantly expanded its regional role. It deployed thousands of fighters to support Bashar al-Assad’s regime, strengthening the Iran-led “Axis of Resistance.”
This involvement enhanced Hezbollah’s military capabilities through battlefield experience and advanced weaponry. However, it also exposed the group to criticism within Lebanon for prioritising regional ambitions over national interests and deepened sectarian tensions, as Hezbollah fought largely Sunni opposition forces.
Following the loss of its Afghan base in 2001, Al Qaeda shifted from a centralised hierarchy to a networked model of semi-autonomous affiliates.
This decentralisation:
Allowed the organisation to survive leadership losses and operational setbacks.
Enabled local affiliates to tailor strategies to regional conditions while adhering to Al Qaeda’s core ideology.
Facilitated expansion into new theatres, including Yemen, Iraq, and North Africa, ensuring the movement’s continued relevance despite intense counterterrorism pressure.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks)
Identify two ways in which Hezbollah challenged Israeli military power during the 2006 Lebanon War.
Mark Scheme:
Award 1 mark for each correct point, up to a maximum of 2 marks.
Use of asymmetric guerrilla tactics, including ambushes and fortified defensive positions. (1 mark)
Launching rocket attacks into northern Israel, demonstrating the ability to strike Israeli territory. (1 mark)
Effective psychological warfare and use of media to maintain morale and project strength. (1 mark – accept any one valid point here)
Question 2 (6 marks)
Explain how non-state actors such as Hamas and Al Qaeda shaped regional conflict and ideology in the Middle East.
Mark Scheme:
Level 1 (1–2 marks):
Basic statements with limited explanation. May identify groups or conflicts without linking to shaping regional conflict or ideology.
Example: “Hamas fought against Israel” or “Al Qaeda carried out terrorist attacks.”
Level 2 (3–4 marks):
Clear explanation of at least one group’s impact on conflict or ideology.
May include reference to tactics or ideology but lacks depth or breadth.
Example: “Hamas shaped conflict through rocket attacks and suicide bombings, opposing peace with Israel.”
Level 3 (5–6 marks):
Well-developed explanation of both groups’ roles, showing how they influenced conflict and ideology.
Should include specific examples and demonstrate understanding of broader regional consequences.
Example points for credit:
Hamas combined Islamism and Palestinian nationalism, reshaping resistance through governance in Gaza and continued armed struggle.
Al Qaeda globalised jihadist ideology, challenging secular regimes and Western influence, influencing conflicts beyond the Middle East through affiliates.
Both groups’ activities altered state responses, security policies, and ideological debates across the region.
