saying they gained dominance because of armed conflict is an understatement. please read on mecca agreement 2007.
Discussion
complex offensive operation? you must be living in a country with no dominant neighbour. i for one living in a nation neighbouring singapore, who was trained by Israel, able to takeover my capital in theorically 6 hours and have in average excurse into our airspace 836 times per year (1). i.e what you called a complex operation is propagated. with that, i do not condone or agree or any attack let it be to israeli or palestinian civilians
reference.
nostr:npub16qct6ge6zdr72yxrw2cc0rsqyp9j9qrjs9pkz3gkydc839jrtk5sj8al6e
Well, Mecca Agreement came after 600-1000 Palestinians were already killed on both sides, including ~200 civilians. The agreement literally calls for “banning the shedding of the Palestinian blood”.
Apparently Hamas sponsors were shocked that their money is being wasted on killing Palestinians when it should be spent on killing Jews, and had to intervene.
nostr:npub1j8m6n55er97404gz59f35yt7h22lqh9dk5algdxlnza90paca7hsk5v5r7 nostr:npub19f72q0s795zwdn5ca8vdl76kjdtvcm3eceagmg8tf97rtad6z00sv6hz40
yes it was a civil war, undeniably which you have to understand its origin. Hamas won the 2006 election but unable to form a government due to the international pressure. such incident also occur around the world, with notable elections in myanmar, guatemala, and venezuela. what i am refuting however is your statement that implies that hamas was taking the government by force.
the mecca agreement was in place to ensure both hamas and fatah could find a delicate feasible rights as an outcome of the election. true enough, post 2007, the Fatah led government become essentially functionless, as what i mentioned earlier
to put in a simpler context, imagine republican won the USA presidential election, then China said, no they want a democrats president. i humbly believe that not only the bloodsheed will be massive, you wont even get a "vatican agreement" to stop the bloodshed of americans