Wars are not fought only with bullets and bombs. They are also fought through stories.
The Gaza War has shown that in the age of social media, the battle for global perception can be just as consequential as the fight on the ground.
Israel’s military campaign has devastated Hamas on the battlefield. However, Hamas launched a parallel offensive in the information sphere, and in many ways it was equally effective. From the first hours of the October 7 assault, Hamas ensured that every atrocity, every strike, and every civilian death the terrorists perpetrated was broadcast, reframed, and weaponized.
Its strategy was simple: Undermine Israel’s legitimacy, erode Western support, and shift the narrative from “terrorist massacre of Jews” to “Israeli aggression against Palestinians.”
This was not accidental. As I cover in depth in my new Henry Jackson Society paper, “Information Manoeuvre,” this was manoeuvre warfare used to manipulate perception. The manoeuvrist approach aims to attack an enemy’s will and cohesion. Hamas embedded its forces in civilian infrastructure, knowing that every Israeli strike would produce images of suffering.
It inflated casualty figures through its Gaza Health Ministry and promoted unverified claims that media outlets often repeated without question.
The infamous explosion at al-Ahli hospital, widely blamed on Israel before evidence showed it was a Palestinian rocket, is the clearest example. By the time the corrections appeared, the damage to Israel’s reputation had already been done.
Information warfare
The outcomes of Hamas’s information manoeuvre are clear. Within weeks of October 7, mass protests erupted in London, Paris, New York, and beyond. Western governments, initially firm in support of Israel, wavered as domestic opinion shifted.
In Britain, thousands of people filled the streets demanding a ceasefire, and the election of a bloc of “Gaza MPs” demonstrated how foreign disinformation can influence democratic politics.
In the US, polls showed that a majority of Americans disapproved of Israel’s actions just months into the war, with younger voters particularly swayed by Gaza’s imagery. Support for Israel among Democrats now sits at 7%.
Hamas has demonstrated how a weaker actor can use information warfare to limit a stronger opponent. By transforming every battlefield loss into a propaganda victory, Hamas forced Israel into a two-front war: one in Gaza and another in the global information sphere.
In strategic terms, Hamas focused not on the IDF’s tanks but on Israel’s political will; its people, by weaponizing videos of the hostages; and its international alliances.
Narrative control
Israel did attempt to fight back. It released raw footage of Hamas’s atrocities, reminded the world of October 7, and exposed Hamas’s use of human shields.
However, these efforts were reactive, often too late to counter viral misinformation. The vivid stream of suffering from Gaza drowned out Israeli messaging.
As military doctrine teaches, whoever seizes the initiative in a battle usually wins; and in the information war, Hamas seized it first.
The lesson is clear. Military superiority alone no longer guarantees strategic victory. Hamas may be militarily defeated in Gaza, but most of Western Europe will recognize a state of Palestine; Gulf states are alienated; Israel itself will not see an end to international lawfare; and individual Israelis abroad will face vexatious prosecutions, victimization, and isolation for years to come.
In modern conflicts, legitimacy is a key point. Western nations at war must integrate narrative control into their strategy from the beginning, not as an afterthought. That involves swift, trustworthy, and proactive communication; adapting messages to diverse audiences; and revealing disinformation before it becomes accepted as “truth.”
Hamas has learned that propaganda can be as potent as rockets. Israel and the democratic world must learn that the story is not secondary to the war – it is the war.■
Andrew Fox is a retired British Army officer and research fellow at the Henry Jackson Society.