PNN – Yasser Abu Shabab, the leader of a local criminal gang in Gaza, was killed in Rafah after openly collaborating with the Israeli regime and misusing humanitarian aid.
According to the report of Pakistan News Network, Hebrew sources reported that Yasser Abu Shabab, one of the main collaborators of the Israeli regime in the Gaza Strip, was killed. Channel 14 of the Israeli television also reported that Abu Shabab, who cooperated with the Israeli occupiers in Gaza, had been killed. Hebrew media announced his death, but the details and motives remain unclear. This incident could be a serious blow to Israeli security plans, as Abu Shabab and his group were key elements in coordination with the Israeli army.
The Rise of Yasser Abu Shabab
Yasser Abu Shabab was born in 1990 in Rafah and belonged to the Al-Tarabin tribe. Before October 7, 2023, he had been arrested for criminal offenses, but after an Israeli airstrike on security headquarters, he was released. After his release, Abu Shabab formed a paramilitary group called “Al-Quwwat Al-Sha’biyya” and became an important operative for Tel Aviv in eastern Rafah. His group was responsible for controlling border areas and monitoring Palestinian resistance movements, assisting the Israeli army in intelligence-gathering operations.
Palestinian media estimated Abu Shabab’s group at between 100 to 300 members. These forces were stationed near the Israeli army and operated directly under its supervision. Despite Abu Shabab’s claims of providing humanitarian aid, investigations showed that his group was involved in stealing and misusing these aids.
Read more:
Three Main Hypotheses Regarding Abu Shabab’s Death
Political analysts have proposed three main hypotheses about Abu Shabab’s death:
- Palestinian Resistance Operation: The first and most likely hypothesis is that resistance groups carried out the operation, as Abu Shabab and his collaborators worked with Israel and posed a direct threat to the resistance. However, no resistance group has claimed responsibility, leaving questions about how the operation was conducted and access to areas under direct Israeli control.
- Killed During Group Operations: The second hypothesis suggests that Abu Shabab was killed during the day-to-day activities of his group. In recent weeks, the group was trying to clear various areas of Rafah and pursue resistance members. It is possible that he and his companions were killed in these operations due to internal clashes or mismanagement.
- Internal Settling of Scores: The third hypothesis involves internal conflicts and efforts to restructure the group’s leadership. Given his suspicious activities and pressure from Israel, members of the group may have eliminated Abu Shabab to appoint new leadership. Recently, “Arabi 21” cited a tribal source from the Al-Tarabin tribe stating, “Abu Shabab was killed by a person from one of the families affiliated with the Tarabin tribe.”
Betrayal of Palestine and Collaboration with Israel
A key aspect of Abu Shabab’s story is his blatant betrayal of the Palestinian people. By forming a criminal gang under direct Israeli supervision in Gaza, he not only threatened local security but also sought to strengthen Israeli control over Rafah and surrounding areas. His actions included monitoring resistance activities, facilitating entry and control of humanitarian aid, and even stealing it, harming the Palestinian population and establishing him as a traitor in the local community.
The silence of his family and tribes, especially the official disavowal by the Al-Tarabin tribe, indicates that Abu Shabab’s social influence and legitimacy in Palestine were nearly zero. This disavowal symbolizes a deep gap between betrayal and Palestinian collective identity. Many Rafah residents called him and his group “Israeli agents,” viewing their cooperation with the occupiers as pure treason.
His activities exemplify internal betrayal supported by Palestine’s enemies, forcing the resistance to take operational measures to protect the population and restore security. Although the exact perpetrator of his killing is unknown, his role in betraying the people and collaborating with Israel is clear to analysts and media.
Social Rejection and Tribal Disavowal
Abu Shabab was completely ostracized by the Palestinian community in Rafah. His family and the Al-Tarabin tribe declared their disavowal of his activities, stating that if he did not surrender and admit his mistakes, his blood would be permissible. This shows that Abu Shabab’s social influence was near zero and tribal support for him had ceased.
Israeli media, including Channel 12 and Army Radio, announced Abu Shabab’s death. Some sources claimed he was killed during internal clashes. Reports also indicate that Hamas forces, using intelligence from sources close to Abu Shabab, played a role in the operation. However, the exact location and execution details remain unclear, and analysts say more information is needed to clarify the matter.
Suspicious Activities and Importance to Israel
Abu Shabab acted as a local liaison with Israel and played a key role in their security plans in Rafah. He and his group operated in areas under Israeli control and collected field intelligence for the army. Following a resistance operation on May 30, 2025, which targeted Abu Shabab’s group, it became evident that his collaboration with Israel included monitoring resistance, obstructing their activities, and stealing humanitarian aid.
Abu Shabab tried to legitimize his actions using his tribal status, but this effort failed, as members of the Al-Tarabin tribe, who had sacrificed many martyrs for the resistance, officially disavowed him. This underscores his isolation and the Palestinian community’s distrust of his actions.
Consequences and Remaining Ambiguities
The death of Yasser Abu Shabab marks a significant development in eastern Rafah and could substantially affect Israeli plans in the region. Important questions remain about the identities of other deceased, the operation’s execution, and the role of resistance entities. The silence of resistance groups and conflicting media reports creates further ambiguity regarding the motive and responsibility for this killing.