Israel using gang leader Abu Shabab to build Gaza 'collaborator villages'

Israeli forces are arming and funding local militias in Gaza, including a group led by accused warlord Yasser Abu Shabab, in a strategy aimed at countering Hamas, according to a Danish investigation that warns the policy mirrors failed "village leagues" experiments in the West Bank.

The Information newspaper reported on Friday that Israel was working with gangs and bandits to infiltrate Gazan society, offering protection and turning a blind eye to their crimes.

The strategy echoed the "village leagues" policy Israel backed in the West Bank from 1978 to 1984 to undermine the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) -- a move that collapsed amid widespread Palestinian rejection.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has openly described the plan as "mobilising the tribes against Hamas", claiming it saves soldiers’ lives, telling reporters: "What's wrong with that? It saves the lives of IDF soldiers."

While Israel has not publicly named the armed groups, photographs published by The Guardian and confirmed through satellite imagery showed men under Abu Shabab's command walking alongside Israeli soldiers in southern Gaza.

Bandit turned militia leader

Abu Shabab, 31, is a former criminal accused of weapons and drug smuggling. He was imprisoned before the war but escaped during the October 2023 Israeli invasion.

He later emerged at the head of a militia using "counter-terrorism" slogans in what Information described as a theatrical display, with uniforms featuring the Palestinian flag and the words "Counter-Terrorism Unit" in Arabic and English.

The UN and local authorities accuse him of masterminding the systematic large-scale looting of humanitarian aid, particularly around the Kerem Shalom crossing.

A leaked UN memo obtained by The Washington Post described him as "the most important and influential actor" behind the theft.

In 2024, international reports linked his group to beatings, kidnappings, and killings of aid truck drivers delivering food to civilians. Abu Shabab has denied the allegations, dismissing them in The New York Times as "Hamas propaganda" and claiming sarcastically: "I didn't steal to sell it, I stole to feed my family."

Israeli media have also alleged ties between his militia and armed groups outside Gaza. In recent months, however, he has presented himself online as a fierce opponent of "terrorism", distancing himself from the 7 October attack and openly criticising Hamas.

No tribal legitimacy

Abu Shabab's claims of tribal leadership have been rejected by Adil al-Tarabin, head of the Tarabin tribe to which he belongs, who told Information he "represents only himself".

In Gaza, he is widely seen as a collaborator who profits from people's suffering and exploits the chaos of war without any social legitimacy.

Tribal leaders and families have consistently refused cooperation with Israel inside the enclave.

Michael Milstein, a former intelligence officer in charge of Palestinian affairs who now heads the Forum for Palestinian Studies at Tel Aviv University, compared the policy to US mistakes in Afghanistan when it armed the Afghan fighters who later became the Taliban.

"We're taking a big risk. We don't know if these groups will remain loyal to us. They could later become hostile, trained militias," he said  in a detailed interview on the Israel Policy Pod podcast. 

He added that Abu Shabab’s so-called "popular forces" pose no real threat to Hamas and were not a viable political alternative, insisting there was no substitute for a political solution.

American historian and author James L. Gelvin, an expert on Middle Eastern history, told Information that Abu Shabab was "a warlord who doesn’t believe in politics, acting only according to his own interests," calling Israel's policy "an old, failed trick" based on arming local militias with no political agenda beyond easing military control if Hamas falls.

The Danish investigation concluded that Israel’s policy of fracturing Palestinian society and backing armed groups with neither legitimacy nor political demands is a dangerous repeat of past mistakes.