Since the attacks on Oct. 7, all legal experts consulted have come to the same conclusion: Hamas’s actions on that day, which included killing, torture, and hostage-taking of civilians, were war crimes. Tom Dannenbaum, a professor at Tufts University, stated shortly after the attack that there was no doubt that multiple war crimes had been committed. Evidence has continued to accumulate since then, with the International Criminal Court seeking warrants for the arrest of three Hamas leaders and two Israeli officials for their involvement in the attacks and subsequent hostage-taking.
A U.N. commission also found credible evidence of war crimes committed by Hamas and other armed Palestinian groups on Oct. 7, as well as evidence of Israeli war crimes. Despite claims from Hamas that its fighters have a moral commitment to avoid harming civilians, the evidence suggests otherwise.
Hamas, although not a state, is still bound by international law, particularly the laws of war. These laws apply universally and do not change based on the actions of the opposing party in a conflict. The purpose of these laws is to protect civilians, regardless of which side of the conflict they are on.
International law may not have a central enforcement authority like domestic legal systems, but it serves as a deterrent and can influence the behavior of armed groups. Compliance with international law can signal legitimacy and willingness to be a part of the international community.
In the case of Hamas, the incentives to comply with international law do not seem to be effective. The group may see little prospect of international acceptance and does not appear to believe that compliance would affect its support among Palestinians. Despite the potential breaches of international law, accountability for Hamas’s actions remains uncertain.