No One Believes Israel’s Terrorist Smear of Murdered Al Jazeera Journalist
Israel’s “He Was Hamas” Excuse Is Wearing Thin
Israel’s latest justification for killing journalists in Gaza followed a script that has become depressingly predictable. Hours after a strike killed Al Jazeera’s Anas al-Sharif and his colleagues in Gaza City on August 10, Israeli military spokespeople claimed al-Sharif was a Hamas operative and even a cell leader. No verifiable evidence was offered, just the assertion, repeated through sympathetic outlets, that the dead reporter was in fact a combatant.
The problem for Israel is that almost no one outside of its own echo chambers believes these claims anymore. The Committee to Protect Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, and other press freedom groups immediately condemned the killing and demanded proof.
Al Jazeera called the allegations fabricated, noting that similar accusations had been recycled from months earlier without substantiation. Reuters confirmed that Israel had pushed the same line in the past. In the absence of evidence, the accusation reads less like an intelligence finding and more like a reflexive PR shield.
On Sky News, presenter Jayne Secker openly questioned Israel’s credibility. While grilling IDF spokesperson Nadav Shoshani on-air, she pointed out that the IDF have not shown evidence that Al-Sharif was currently working for Hamas, and went on to ridicule the spokesperson’s attempt to smear Al Jazeera’s name, pointing out that they are a respected international news organisation. Her skepticism echoed a growing sentiment among seasoned reporters that the “Hamas operative” label is not supported by any credible evidence.
The Guardian’s editorial board went further, framing the smear against al-Sharif as part of a systematic effort to “wipe out the witnesses” to the war in Gaza. In a sharply worded piece, the paper called the accusation “unreliable” and “wholly unproven,” warning that such posthumous branding erodes the protections journalists are afforded under international law. The editorial stressed that, in the absence of clear and verifiable proof, the claim amounts to nothing more than an attempt to justify what could be a war crime.
Both reactions underscore a broader shift in how mainstream newsrooms are treating Israel’s habitual “he was Hamas” defense. Once repeated without challenge, these claims are now meeting open resistance from prominent journalists and editors who have grown tired of hearing the same baseless refrain after every killing.
This tactic has been deployed repeatedly in recent years. When veteran Al Jazeera correspondent Shireen Abu Akleh was shot dead by an Israeli sniper in Jenin in 2022, officials initially denied responsibility, then pivoted to vague insinuations about her being caught in crossfire, and finally allowed supporters to float claims about her proximity to militants, none of which were supported by independent investigations. In 2018, when Palestinian photojournalist Yaser Murtaja was killed by Israeli fire during protests in Gaza, he too was accused posthumously of being a Hamas member. The claim was immediately disputed by his colleagues and contradicted by the fact that Murtaja had been vetted by the U.S. for a media grant just weeks earlier.
Other examples abound. Freelance journalist Rushdi Sarraj, co-founder of Ain Media, was killed in an airstrike in October 2023; Israel labeled him a Hamas operative within hours, without presenting evidence. When Palestinian journalist Ahmed Abu Hussein died from wounds sustained while covering protests, he was similarly smeared. In each case, the government’s pattern was clear: when a journalist is killed, brand them a terrorist, shift the narrative from a potential war crime to a supposed act of self-defense, and count on the news cycle to move on before the claim collapses.
The aim is not just to discredit the individual reporter but to undermine the credibility of Palestinian journalism as a whole. By repeatedly linking journalists to Hamas, Israel attempts to make every camera lens look like a weapon, every press vest a disguise. Under international law, journalists are civilians. Targeting them is a crime unless they take a direct part in hostilities. Baseless accusations are not evidence, and yet these smears are treated domestically as if they close the case.
The international audience has grown increasingly skeptical. Even the European Union condemned the killing of al-Sharif, and no credible Western ally has echoed the Hamas accusation. Press freedom advocates now cite the “he was Hamas” narrative itself as evidence of a state policy to silence dissenting coverage. The pattern has become too obvious to ignore: a journalist dies, the state offers an unsubstantiated militant label, and the world is asked to take it on faith.
In Gaza, each new name added to the list of slain reporters underscores the stakes of reporting under siege. For those still holding cameras and microphones, Israel’s baseless smears serve as both a threat and a warning: not only can you be killed, but your life’s work will be rewritten in death. For the rest of the world, the only responsible response is to reject these unfounded narratives and demand accountability before there are no more journalists left to tell the story.