Hamas and the Use of Civilian Infrastructure in Gaza

This page makes a narrow claim. The public record supports one thing. Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups have put weapons, launches, tunnel entrances, or command work in or near civilian sites in Gaza. The record does not back every Israeli claim about every hospital, school, or apartment block.

That line matters. A research page should be clear about what is well proven, what is disputed, and what the law actually says.

What is well documented

Three things sit firmly in the record.

First, the U.N. itself has said that weapons were found in U.N. school buildings in Gaza. On 23 July 2014, the U.N. Secretary-General’s spokesman said rockets had been placed in a UNRWA school and had later gone missing. UNRWA’s later review of the 2014 war said weapons placed by Palestinian militant groups were found in three empty UNRWA schools during the war.¹²

Second, major human-rights groups have tracked Palestinian armed groups firing from or working inside dense civilian areas. Human Rights Watch wrote in 2009 that rocket fire from dense areas put Gaza civilians at risk in a way that broke the law. Amnesty International’s 2015 review of the 2014 war found credible cases where Palestinian armed groups fired rockets or mortars from civilian sites. These included schools, at least one hospital, and a church complex.³⁴

Third, the main hospital claim is no longer only Israeli. In January 2024, the Associated Press and the Washington Post both reported that U.S. intelligence was highly confident of one thing. Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the U.S. said, used the Al-Shifa hospital and sites beneath it. They used them to support fighting, store some weapons, and hold at least a few hostages. The Washington Post’s own open-source review warned against overstating what had been proved about the scale and layout.⁵⁶

The careful point is not that every dramatic wartime claim was true. It is that repeated fighting from or use of civilian sites and dense civilian areas is part of the record.

What the law says

International humanitarian law sets duties for both the attacker and the defender.

The defender may not use civilians or civilian sites to shield military action. Additional Protocol I says civilians may not be used to make points or areas immune from attack. It also asks parties to avoid placing military targets in dense areas when they can. The ICRC’s study of customary international humanitarian law treats the ban on human shields as a customary rule, not a niche treaty line.⁷⁸

That is the legal frame for what the record shows. If an armed group stores weapons in a school, runs command activity under a hospital, or fires often from dense homes, that conduct is unlawful.

The other side of the law matters just as much. Civilian sites do not become fair targets just because an armed group abuses them. Attackers still owe duties of distinction, proportionality, and feasible precautions. For special sites like hospitals, the law expects a warning when possible before protection is treated as lost.⁸⁹

What this does not prove

This page is not a license to overclaim.

It does not prove that every site struck by Israel was a lawful target. It does not prove that every Israeli account of tunnel networks or command centers was right in every detail. It does not erase the civilian character of Gaza’s people. Gazans remain civilians unless and until they take direct part in fighting.

Some wartime claims have been too sweeping. The Washington Post’s review of Al-Shifa found signs of military use. It did not find enough public proof to back every early Israeli claim that the hospital was a fully shown central command complex. That is why the narrower framing is the stronger one.⁶

Bottom line

The solid claim is not that “all of Gaza is a Hamas base.” It is that Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups have repeatedly used civilian buildings and dense civilian areas for military ends. That conduct is unlawful. It also shapes strategy. It helps explain why Gaza combat is so deadly. It does not become a blank check for unlawful Israeli force.

Sources