Between London and Gaza… How Meshaal managed the Brotherhood’s secret deals
Palestinian academic and politician Ibrahim Abrash described Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal as the “most dangerous” figure within the Muslim Brotherhood and on the Palestinian scene, viewing him as the mastermind behind policies aimed at replacing Palestinian national identity with cross-border organizational agendas.
In an analytical article published on the Amad website, Abrash argued that Hamas, under Mashaal’s guidance, does not operate as a national liberation movement, but rather as a branch or tool serving the objectives of the Muslim Brotherhood, whose ambitions go beyond Palestine’s borders.
He noted that this project essentially intersects with international visions for creating what is called the “New Middle East,” where the Palestinian cause and the people of Gaza are sacrificed for narrow political and organizational gains.
Abrash cited earlier statements by movement leaders who downplayed the value of Palestinian land compared to ideology, stressing that the external leadership — headed by Meshaal — exploited the emotional and national drive of Gaza’s residents and movement members inside the territory, turning them into “fuel” for battles serving Brotherhood decision-making centers in London and other regional capitals.
The analysis also uncovered the role Meshaal played in shaping the leadership map within Hamas, pointing out that he contributed to promoting Gaza-based figures such as Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar — not through genuine democratic processes, but as part of a broader plan to divide roles.
According to Abrash, the purpose of putting “Gazans” at the forefront was to make them directly accountable for the devastation that struck the Strip as a result of confrontational policies, while the real leadership abroad remained shielded from accountability.
Abrash also discussed Meshaal’s recent statements calling on Washington to negotiate directly with Hamas over Gaza’s future, likening this move to that of Abu Mohammad Al-Jolani in Syria. He believes Mashaal is trying to present the movement’s credentials as a “political partner” capable of controlling the situation on the ground and securing borders, in exchange for international recognition that would keep the organization in power — even at the expense of the weapons the movement long glorified as a strategic option.
He concluded that Meshaal’s strategy ultimately aims to replace the Palestine Liberation Organization — not to establish a stable state, but to secure a functional role for the movement in upcoming regional arrangements.
He warned that continuing down this path will perpetuate systematic division and destroy the chances of establishing an independent Palestinian state, while the tragedy of Gaza is exploited to collect billions of dollars from which the Palestinian citizen sees no tangible benefit.
