This essay analyzes Palestinian resistance and European/Zionist intervention in Palestinian sovereignty, centred around the revolutionary Palestinian figure of Izz al-Din al-Qassam as explored in Mark Sanagan’s 2020 biography, Lightning through the Clouds: ‘Izz al-Din al-Qassam and the Making of the Modern Middle East. Al-Qassam’s life and legacy chronicle the end of empire and the beginning of ethno-nationalism in Palestine, shaped by the deliberate actions of outside actors on native Palestinian Arabs. These actions have produced an image of al-Qassam that personifies a nationalism inseparable from Islam, anti-colonialism, and violence. Therefore, this essay argues that al-Qassam’s posthumous characterization reveals that it is the transcendence of Islam, anti-colonialism, and violence that defines public memory and nationalism regarding historical figures in the modern Palestinian struggle. Specifically, this essay will analyze three distinct points in al-Qassam’s history from this lens: his Ottoman roots, time in Haifa, and death.

Experience in the Ottoman Empire: The Institutionalization of Islam and Islamic Nationhood

Sanagan writes that al-Qassam’s Ottoman roots are extremely important despite often being overlooked.¹ The value that al-Qassam found in fighting for an independent Islamic empire highlights the intertwined importance of nationalism, Islam, anti-colonialism, and armed struggle which al-Qassam today represents. Al-Qassam’s Ottoman experience was imperative given the exposure it gave him to the institutionalization of Islam in society and education. His view of the right to practice Islam as institutional to the state has its roots in his early years, as he was born into the Ottoman-sponsored Naqshbandi Sufi order.² Additionally, during al-Qassam’s early years, the ulama in the Ottoman empire took an active role in making education Islamic with a modern curriculum.³ This kind of integration of Islamic tradition into modern statehood institutions is rooted in Ottoman policy, therefore tying Islamic institutions to national institutions, influencing al-Qassam’s formative years as he attended al-Azhar in Cairo. 

At al-Azhar, student living quarters were divided by the regions of the Ottoman empire. So, al-Qassam almost definitely lived in the dormitories for students from the Syrian provinces, namely Riwaq al-Shawwam.⁴ On the surface, this regional breakdown of the dormitories does not support nationalist sentiments and is especially not linked to a political entity of “Palestine”. Rather, what was important about this in his future character was an Islamic education and the ideas of modernization he was exposed to. Overall, Sanagan asserts that al-Qassam’s time at al-Azhar was important in formulating his worldview during this time of political, religious, and colonial flux. A lot of the major aspects of al-Qassam’s education–Islamic institutionalism and self-sufficiency–reflect the Palestinian struggle. Conversely, the absence of concrete knowledge in al-Qassam’s individual experience allows for him to be historically characterized in this period by the environment and influences around him.

The other formative experience in the Ottoman empire, as explored by Sanagan, is al-Qassam’s time fighting in the Italian-Ottoman War, World War I, and the resistance to the French in Syria. These experiences resulted in al-Qassam embodying the roles of both military figure and preacher After the European invasion of Tripolitania, al-Qassam’s sermons began containing messages of jihad and he began recruiting men to join the Ottoman side, demonstrating how he connected Islam to the protection of an Islamic society resisting European colonialism. Like many Arab men, he also voluntarily joined the Ottoman army during WWI.⁵ Al-Qassam’s path after the war remains unclear, but he did find his way to join anti-French rebel groups in Syria after the European powers divided the territories of the dissolved Ottoman Empire among themselves, imposing the mandate system upon the Middle East. After the French condemned him to death in Syria, he fled to Palestine, thus exposing him to colonial responses to Arab attempts at self-determination.⁶

This experience of colonial and European violence against anti-colonialist Islamist forces is another experience that modern Palestinian groups can draw on as an experience that connects them with the young al-Qassam. For al-Qassam, colonial violence and Islamic independence transcended the fall of the Ottoman Empire and the transition to the nation-state. For many Palestinians today, colonial violence and Islamic independence transcend the death of al-Qassam and modern Israeli settler-colonialism. Once again, what is recorded of al-Qassam during this period stands in equal importance to what is uncertain. In this case, the fact that he fought and preached is known, but his individual experience, route, and thoughts are not. Thus, his role as an Ottoman/Islamist fighter defines this period in al-Qassam’s history.

Time in Haifa: the “Soldier Sheikh”

    After his exile from Syria, al-Qassam lived in Haifa during the 1920s. This was a crucial time of the tightening of British mandatory control and increasing Jewish migration to Palestine after the 1917 Balfour Declaration.⁷ Furthermore, the British directly governed Palestine through the mandate both because of fractured Palestinian Arab leadership, and the support of Zionists who saw the Balfour Declaration as a means to a Jewish national home.⁸ This support for British rule largely stemmed from the oppressive conditions which Jews experienced in Eastern Europe, thus strengthening the coalition between the British and Zionists and, in turn, minimizing the position of the local Arab population.⁹ 

When al-Qassam arrived in Haifa, a combination of religious authority and class interests had produced an Islamic Society that was tightly interwoven into the politics of the city.¹⁰ Al-Qassam found community and employment in the Islamic Society, which itself as an institution interwove Islam, politics, and education. He worked as both a teacher at al-Burj Islamic school and preached at al-Jarina mosque, giving him the experience of being a part of Islamic institutions in a time when tension between local Arabs and the British and Zionists was on the rise.¹¹ Critically, the al-Jarina mosque was frequented by poor working labourers of Haifa who were seeing their position further declining with Zionist land purchases throughthe acceleration of the British-supported Jewish National Home project.¹² Thus, in Haifa, al-Qassam experienced first-hand how the struggles of local poor Palestinians intersected with increased British and Zionist involvement in Palestine.

    Al-Qassam’s involvement in workers’ rights also influenced his characterisationby Marxist/Maoist Palestinian liberation movements. Around 1925, al-Qassam began getting directly involved with Arab labour organizations in Haifa. His experience with labour organizations would be inherently anti-Zionist and anti-colonialist because of the conditions in Haifa. The Zionist and British colonial position stood united in opposition to Palestinian workers, as the British were specifically suspicious of Palestinian labour groups in Haifa on suspicion of being fronts for political organizations.¹³ What this also suggests is the inevitable failure of Palestinian diplomatic and political efforts to negotiate freedom and independence, as from the early 1920s, the British did not intend to consider the interests of Palestinian positions as they did Zionist leaders. Al-Qassam’s experience with this political standstill and class disparity likely informed his turn to armed resistance, seeing the nonaction of other Palestinian leaders who had relied thus far on politics and speeches.¹⁴ This connects to the conception of al-Qassam as a man of action, informing both how he is viewed and how Palestinian liberation groups view themselves as necessarily armed. His involvement in labour organizations holds particular historical significance as it occurred during pivotal years of the displacement of Palestinian Arabs by the growing Yishuv, a process that is still actively growing Israeli control of Palestine. This particular importance of al-Qassam’s legacy in cementing the centrality of workers in Palestinian struggle is also reflected by Ghassan Kanafani who, as a spokesperson for the Marxist Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine likened al-Qassam to Che Guevara.¹⁵ Thus, the increased involvement of al-Qassam in labour organizations by-product of the colonial and economic situation in Haifa gave background to his characterization in public memory as it is useful to Marxist Palestinian organizations.

Al-Qassam’s time in Haifa reveals that his jihad was based on a commitment to Islam and anti-colonialism, and this was certainly reflected in how he eventually mobilized this into an armed struggle. However, what is notable is that al-Qassam’s preaching did not promote himself as a leader of a certain organization–he preached individual change, self-sufficiency, and personal commitments to Islam to mobilize oneself against colonialism.¹⁶ This could explain why al-Qassam’s legacy is serviceable to a Palestinian nationalism today, as al-Qassam did not organize around a certain group or militia. Rather, his ideas of anti-colonialism are highly applicable to the continuous struggle Palestinian nationalist groups see themselves in. Thus, it was perhaps this lack of central organization or loyalty and an emphasis on self-sufficiency and advocacy which make al-Qassam’s characterization and experiences essential to how Palestinian nationalists can trace their brand of anti-colonialist and Islamic nationalism.

Armed Resistance and Martyrdom

    Al-Qassam’s time fighting as part of Palestinian armed resistance is perhaps the most direct mirror of the armed conflict in Palestine today. His final years show that his deeply-held ideologies of self-sufficiency, anti-colonialism, and Islamic institutions were far from superficial or self-servicing. Furthermore, immediately after his death, he was hailed as a martyr, forever cementing his anti-colonialism with his deep connection to Islam. 

As discussed in the previous section, Haifa, and therefore al-Qassam, had a tense experience during the 1920s and 1930s as it came into intense contact with Zionism which displaced Arab peoples and reduced the social and economic standing of Arab workers, thus generating a unique mobilization movement in the 1930s.¹⁷ The spark for al-Qassam to take these experiences to armed struggle was, as it was for many Palestinian groups, the discovery that Jewish paramilitary forces were smuggling arms into Palestine in 1935.¹⁸ This came after the increased tension between Arab Palestinians and the British/Zionist forces, as in 1931 the “Black Letter” confirmed to many that Zionist groups were effectively able to influence the British government. Al-Qassam felt that this threat constituted a rethinking of his activism and ideas of Islamic resistance, as he approached Rashid al-Hajj Ibrahim asking what he thought about the idea of armed revolt as opposed to diplomacy.¹⁹ Shortly after, al-Qassam left Haifa to organize rebel groups and fight.²⁰ Al-Qassam’s new commitment to armed rebellion showed a continued commitment to Islam and anti-colonialism rather than himself as a figurehead or his teachings as scripture. Al-Qassam’s mobilization took the form of a rebel group, where each cell had a different role working towards a loosely-defined set of goals. The importance of Islam and class struggle was central to his armed rebellion, as there were no land-owning mujahidin in his ranks.  In an interview in Filastin, he referred to peasants and workers: “Whoever has these qualities is more likely to sacrifice, and is more daring to go forward … [He] is able to endure difficulties and is stronger.” He maintained a spirit of self-sufficiency, as recruits had to have their own weapons and train themselves. Financial support was hard to come by, so the embeddedness of self-sufficiency was also likely out of necessity.²¹ Financial hardship and isolation are themes from al-Qassam’s days in the hills, carrying over to how he is remembered and how he influenced Palestinian liberation. Jewish settlers continuously saw their position increase in Palestine while Arabs saw theirs decrease, notably after World War II.²² Thus, it is in the best interest and out of necessity that Palestinian groups both in al-Qassam’s time and today have principles of self-sufficiency and an emphasis on the working poor of Palestine. What al-Qassam did not define was almost as important as what he did define in his posthumous memory, as it is this commitment to Islam in opposition to Zionist forces as well as his willingness to take up arms that allows for his experience of jihad to serve as history for Palestinian liberation groups today.

There is further ambiguity surrounding al-Qassam’s last hours during the gunfight in Ya’bad, but the immediate memorialization of his life and martyrdom is what cemented his legacy, including the reactions of both Zionist/British and Palestinian notables.²³ The reaction of future Israeli prime minister David Ben-Gurion reveals that al-Qassam’s life transcended multiple periods of Palestinian struggle: the transition from empire to nation-state; Ottoman Muslim provinces to European colonial dividing and imposed nationhood. Then, the transition from the mandate system to independence: although he died before the end of the mandate, Ben-Gurion himself feared that al-Qassam’s death would be the Palestinians’ Tel Hai.²⁴ This pre-emptive fear shows the momentous impact which al-Qassam’s example was expected to have for the national consciousness of Palestinian peoples, even if al-Qassam was not a nationalist. On the Palestinian side, one eulogy proclaimed, “None has served the homeland but you with loyalty, and where is the valour of the sons of the homeland? Since you are Izz al-Din and the only one who is of true faith … they killed you and they were not rightfully appointed to rule you”, showing the inherent connection between al-Qassam, anti-colonialism, Islam, and a “homeland”–an Islamic nation as it stood in opposition to the British and Zionism.²⁵ Jamal al-Husayni, the Palestinian Arab Party president, is quoted as saying: “One day it might be that every Palestinian would become as one of those [Qassamites] who were killed a few days ago new Jenin,” perhaps creating a self-fulfilling prophecy as the legacy he was perceived to have iswhat informed his actual legacy in the imagination of Palestinians and Israelis.²⁶ Therefore, both the pro-Israeli and Palestinian reactions are well-recorded while al-Qassam’s actual last words and thoughts are not, thus memorializing the reactions as part of al-Qassam’s history. 

Conclusion

What al-Qassam’s story and legacy tell us about history is that it is not always the direct and specific ideologies, actions, and words of “national heroes” that make them important. If their experiences transcend time and appear just as pertinent to struggles throughout the nation’s history, it is these transcendent experiences and how they lend to the construction of the nation that are more important. Al-Qassam’s most intimate thoughts and specific beliefs in many regards are unknown, and he produced little original writings to illuminate us today. However, his place in history is as much informed by the political and religious climate of his time as it is by the ongoing struggle for nationhood that Palestinians face today, namely the maintenance of an Islamic character in the face of violence and settler-colonialism. Thus, al-Qassam’s involvement in independence against both the British and Zionists and his death is a familiar experience for Palestinians today, cementing his place in the history of Palestinian liberation. The experience of jihad and martyrdom transcends when Palestine as an independent Muslim nation still is not recognized any more (in fact, because of Israeli land seizures, less) than it was in al-Qassam’s time. Political and militarized Zionism still poses an existential threat to Palestinians, and al-Qassam’s story connects today’s struggle with the early-to-mid-twentieth century transition period from empire to nationhood worldwide, in which Palestine was and still is left behind.

Alexandra Liu is in her third year, pursuing an International Relations specialist and History major. Her academic interests include political histories of decolonization in its many manifestations during the 20th century. Particularly, she is interested in uncovering ongoing consequences of colonialism, including cultural, political, and economic legacies.

1. Mark Sanagan, Lightning through the Clouds: ‘Izz al-Din al-Qassam and the Making of the Modern Middle East, (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2020), 139.
2. Sanagan, Lightning, 20.
3. Sanagan, Lightning, 28.
4. Sanagan, Lightning, 33.
5. Sanagan, Lightning, 40, 42.
6. Sanagan, Lightning, 45.
7. Sanagan, Lightning, 62.
8. James Reilly, “Palestine Mandate and Creation of Israel.”Lecture, University of Toronto, 28 October 2021.
9. William L. Cleveland and Martin Bunton, A History of the Modern Middle East, (New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis, 2016), 32.
10. Sanagan, Lightning, 53.
11. Sanagan, Lightning, 55, 58.
12. Sanagan, Lightning, 60, 64.
13. Sanagan, Lightning, 68.
14. Sanagan, Lightning, 131.
15. Sanagan, Lightning, 136.
16. Sanagan, Lightning, 85.
17. Sanagan, Lightning, 66.
18. Sanagan, Lightning, 106.
19. William L. Cleveland and Martin Bunton, A History of the Modern Middle East, (New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis, 2016), 47.
20. Sanagan, Lightning, 106.
21. Sanagan, Lightning, 109-111, 114.
22. James Reilly, “Palestine Mandate and Creation of Israel.” Lecture, University of Toronto, 28 October 2021.
23. Sanagan, Lightning, 116.
24. Sanagan, Lightning, 117.
25. Sanagan, Lightning, 118.
26. Sanagan, Lightning, 107.