Iran war sits at the center of this dementia and brain health question.

Hamas has become functionally irrelevant as a military and political force in the Middle East after the Iran war began in February 2026. The organization that once wielded significant power in Gaza and the region has been reduced to a weakened entity with minimal independent military or political capacity. The assassination of its top political leader, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran in July 2024, combined with the military depletion of its forces in Gaza, set the stage for this decline.

When the US-Israel war on Iran commenced on February 28, 2026—following Iran’s earlier retaliation for the killings of Hamas and Hezbollah leaders with 180 ballistic missiles in October 2024—Hamas found itself with almost no leverage and no clear role to play in the escalating conflict. Today, Hamas exists as a shadow of its former self, bound by an October 2025 disarmament agreement that requires it to disarm and relinquish power in Gaza, though it has refused to formally commit to these terms. Rather than directing regional conflict, Hamas now spends its energy making desperate diplomatic appeals to Iran and other nations, urging them to stop fighting. This reversal reflects the organization’s dramatic loss of status and autonomy in less than two years.

How Hamas Lost Its Military Capacity in Gaza
Iran’s Escalation and Hamas’s Precarious Position
The October 2025 Disarmament Agreement and Hamas’s Refusal
Hamas’s Weakened Standing Within Iran’s “Axis of Resistance”
Desperate Diplomatic Outreach and the Loss of Independent Power
Hamas’s Inability to Influence the Current Iran War
The Uncertain Future of Hamas as a Political Organization
Conclusion

How Hamas Lost Its Military Capacity in Gaza

Hamas ceased to function as a meaningful military force in Gaza well before the wider Iran-Israel tensions escalated in 2024. The organization’s military wing had been systematically weakened through years of conflict, and by the time broader regional tensions were mounting, Hamas no longer possessed the infrastructure, weapons, or operational capability to wage sustained military campaigns.

This collapse happened relatively quickly once international pressure and military actions intensified against the group. The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in July 2024 removed not just a figurehead but Hamas’s supreme political authority—the person who made final decisions on behalf of the organization. Unlike military leaders who might be replaced, Haniyeh’s death created a leadership vacuum that Hamas has never fully recovered from. The organization lacks the cohesion and decision-making structure it once had, making it increasingly dependent on other actors like Iran, Qatar, and Turkey.

How Hamas Lost Its Military Capacity in Gaza

Iran’s Escalation and Hamas’s Precarious Position

When iran launched 180 ballistic missiles against Israel in October 2024, ostensibly in retaliation for the killings of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah, it marked a critical turning point. Iran positioned itself as the defender of the “axis of resistance” against Israel and Western powers, but Hamas—which had previously benefited from being part of this alliance—suddenly found itself caught in the middle of a much larger conflict. Hamas had not asked for or authorized Iran’s missile strike, and the group lacked the military capacity to participate meaningfully in the escalation.

The situation worsened when the US and Israel initiated direct military action against Iran on February 28, 2026. Iran has since retaliated with missile and drone attacks against at least ten countries, spreading the conflict far beyond the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Hamas, meanwhile, has no military assets to defend itself or strike back. The organization’s former patron, Iran, is now fighting for its own survival against two major military powers, leaving Hamas with no protection and no relevance to the broader conflict.

The October 2025 Disarmament Agreement and Hamas’s Refusal

In October 2025, an agreement was finalized that explicitly required Hamas to disarm and cease wielding political power in Gaza. This agreement essentially stripped away the last vestiges of Hamas’s authority. However, Hamas has not committed to complying with these terms, citing Israel’s continued military presence in Gaza and the lack of progress toward Palestinian statehood as reasons for refusing.

The group’s position reveals a critical weakness: it can refuse to disarm, but it lacks the military strength to meaningfully resist if enforcement were attempted. What makes this situation unusual is that Hamas is bound by an agreement it did not accept while simultaneously having no power to enforce its own conditions. The organization demanded Israeli withdrawal and Palestinian independence before disarming, but neither condition appears likely to be met anytime soon. This puts Hamas in a position of perpetually refusing an agreement it has no power to challenge or escape from—a humiliating position for an organization that once claimed to represent Palestinian resistance.

The October 2025 Disarmament Agreement and Hamas's Refusal

Hamas’s Weakened Standing Within Iran’s “Axis of Resistance”

On March 14, 2026, Hamas issued a public statement urging Iran to halt its attacks on neighboring Gulf states, while simultaneously affirming Iran’s right to defend itself against Israel and the United States. This statement perfectly encapsulates Hamas’s diminished role within regional politics. The organization was essentially asking its former patron to stop fighting—a request it had no leverage to enforce and that Iran could safely ignore.

The statement revealed that Hamas’s position within the “axis of resistance” had shifted dramatically. Rather than being a peer actor or valued military partner, Hamas had become a dependent entity with no meaningful influence over Iranian decision-making. The organization could not even make a clear, unequivocal demand; instead, it hedged its position by affirming Iran’s right to retaliate against Israel, essentially saying it supported Iran’s war while also wanting Iran to stop fighting in certain areas. This contradiction underscores Hamas’s complete loss of independent agency.

Desperate Diplomatic Outreach and the Loss of Independent Power

In its current state, Hamas’s primary activity has been diplomatic outreach to officials in Qatar, Turkey, Iraq, and other countries, urging them to work toward halting aggression against Iran. This represents a dramatic reversal from the organization’s past role as a military actor. Hamas is now essentially begging other nations to intervene on behalf of Iran—a nation that has stopped providing meaningful support to Hamas and is preoccupied with its own survival. This diplomatic offensive demonstrates that Hamas has become entirely dependent on the goodwill of other actors. The organization cannot provide security, military support, or political stability to anyone.

It can only appeal to shared interests and ask for help. Even as it reaches out to multiple countries, Hamas has minimal credibility or leverage. Qatar and Turkey have been willing to host Hamas leaders in exile, but neither country has the ability or willingness to protect Hamas from the consequences of the broader Iran-Israel war. Iraq faces its own internal pressures and cannot be a reliable partner. Hamas is essentially adrift without any strong patron or independent capacity.

Desperate Diplomatic Outreach and the Loss of Independent Power

Hamas’s Inability to Influence the Current Iran War

The US-Israel war on Iran, which began February 28, 2026, has completely marginalized Hamas as a political actor. Iran has retaliated with missile and drone attacks against at least ten countries, and the conflict shows no signs of resolution. Throughout all of this escalation, Hamas has had no meaningful input, no military role, and no way to shape outcomes. The organization simply watches as events unfold around it, powerless to intervene or influence the trajectory of the conflict.

This powerlessness extends beyond the military domain. Hamas cannot negotiate on behalf of Palestinian interests because it has been stripped of political authority in Gaza. It cannot mediate between Iran and its enemies because it has no credibility with either side. It cannot provide security to Palestinians because it has no military forces. Hamas exists in a state of complete irrelevance to the major geopolitical conflicts swirling around it, which is precisely why the organization has resorted to public statements urging others to stop fighting—it is the only tool remaining in its toolkit.

The Uncertain Future of Hamas as a Political Organization

Looking ahead, Hamas faces an existential crisis with no clear resolution. The organization cannot reclaim military power in Gaza while Israel maintains military control of the territory. It cannot regain its role as part of the “axis of resistance” because Iran is focused entirely on its own survival. It cannot claim to represent Palestinian interests because it has been sidelined from governance.

The October 2025 disarmament agreement essentially rendered Hamas a vestigial organization—it exists, it has some personnel and resources, but it serves no clear function and exercises no real power. The most likely scenario in the near term is that Hamas will continue as a diminished political entity with a diaspora of leaders scattered across Qatar, Turkey, and other countries. The organization may attempt to rebuild some form of political presence in Gaza once the current Iran war winds down and Israeli military operations cease, but such a scenario remains speculative. For now, Hamas is an organization in name more than in substance—a shadow of the militant group that once commanded attention and resources across the Middle East.

Conclusion

Hamas’s status after the Iran war began is one of near-total collapse. The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the military depletion of the organization’s forces in Gaza, and the binding disarmament agreement of October 2025 have combined to strip Hamas of military power, political authority, and regional influence. Where Hamas once wielded significant leverage as a member of the “axis of resistance,” the organization now exists in a state of dependency and irrelevance. Its primary activity has become diplomatic pleading—asking other nations to intervene on behalf of Iran and urging Iran itself to scale back its military operations, requests that carry virtually no weight because Hamas has nothing to offer in return.

The broader lesson is that organizational power is never permanent. Hamas built its strength over decades through military operations, social services, and regional alliances, but those assets evaporated in the span of less than two years once the geopolitical environment shifted and key leaders were eliminated. Going forward, Hamas will likely remain a marginal player in Middle Eastern politics unless circumstances change dramatically—which would require either a resolution to the Iran war or a major shift in Palestinian politics that restores Hamas’s relevance. Neither outcome appears imminent.