Talk:Popular Forces

This page is subject to the extended confirmed restriction related to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not merged. As more information was added to Abu Shabab's article, it became clear that he was notable in his own right. EvansHallBear (talk) 20:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

---

I propose merging Yasser Abu Shabab into Abu Shabab group. Abu Shabab is not notable outside of his leadership of the Abu Shabab group. There is substantial overlap between the two articles, making Yasser Abu Shabab WP:REDUNDANT EvansHallBear (talk) 17:42, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

I agree. Everything in Shabab's article could be included in this one. Rainsage (talk) 18:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Support. Longhornsg (talk) 19:18, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Support per nom. Evaporation123 (talk) 22:23, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

Oppose Yasser Abu shabab had military activities prior to the formation of the popular forces in May 2025 leading a group of highwaymen that frequently targeted aid

this is from November 24https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/11/18/gaza-looting-aid-convoys-israel-famine/

Hamas attempted to assassinate Yasser back in November, when the Hamas security forces launched an ambush that killed several highwaymen back in November, in this article Yasser is mentioned by name

https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/gaza-security-forces-ambush-gang The Great Mule of Eupatoria (talk) 06:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Oppose, per above. 2018rebel 06:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per above Davisonio (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Strong Oppose He has a long history and is apparently tied with ISIS. He is also the leader of an important modern group spearheading an important part in one of the most important modern wars. Sorry for so much "importants" but it's true. Yesyesmrcool (talk) 03:35, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per above. Skitash (talk) 14:18, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Oppose per above. Two different topics, even if there is inherent overlap ☞ Rim ^{< Talk | Edits >} 22:02, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Oppose– they are different topics one about the leader who has done things before Popular forces and one about the current group. GothicGolem29 (talk) 12:36, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article title

Abu Shabab group does not seem to be the most common name for the organization. Most reliable sources use "Abu Shabab's group," while discussing Yasser Abu Shabab or refer to it as the "Popular Forces" or "Anti-Terror Service." The article should be moved to have a more recognizable and commonly used name or if one does not exist, the official name. 2018rebel 22:02, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

I support a move to Anti-Terror Service, which is the most common name in sources. Evaporation123 (talk) 22:21, 6 June 2025 (UTC)

The "Popular Forces" seems to be the name most commonly used by the organization itself. More recent articles from the New York Times, Jerusalem Post, Al Jazeera, and the Times of Israel seem to have shifted to the name as well. 2018rebel 04:27, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

If that is indeed the case I am fully behind a move. Evaporation123 (talk) 04:41, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

This needs disambiguating from Popular Forces of Burundi and Forças Populares 25 de Abril, and probably also the two articles at Popular Liberation Forces and the two articles called Popular Force and Popular Force Party. A dab page obviously needs to be made but before we do so, is this article really the primary topic for the term "Popular Forces"? – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 17:51, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

No evidence for IS links

Liberman has made several untrue claims in the past and this is no different. There is no evidence for IS links to this group. 108.29.64.228 (talk) 02:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

agree RossoSPC (talk) 03:07, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Support de-emphasization of alleged IS links. The primary references are a Pan-Arab newspaper and the Israeli opposition. They should be removed from the infobox. It is sufficient to reference the accusations in the article itself. 2018rebel 03:34, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Lieberman's statement is ambiguous, but there is another Israeli government source alleging "ties" to IS.

According to Ynet/Yedioth Ahronoth (as reported by The i Paper, a reliable British source), an unnamed Israeli security official says the Popular Force has "close ties to Isis-affiliates across the border in Egypt". (https://inews.co.uk/news/world/the-isis-linked-bandit-gang-working-with-israel-in-gaza-3735530?srsltid=AfmBOop94byf_cb9kUHHAiveuyOWehBuuopeybq1suhXRh_CJwfb_xbV)

Now "close ties" is an ambiguous phrase and there is no elaboration about whether these are specifically military or ideological connections.

I think it's best to wait a little bit to see if anything definitive comes up. As of now, consider that the most noteworthy things about the Popular Forces are: 1) The Israeli support and anti-Hamas stance 2) The looting 3) The alleged IS affiliation. I will remove the "Islamic Statism" ideology from the infobox though, which is the most appropriate "de-emphasization" for now. Evaporation123 (talk) 04:21, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

other israeli politicians confirms Isis links https://x.com/yairlapid/status/1930633614846288106?t=luL5GsqOOA7nQb34OxfHHw&s=19 Kakashi7640sharinghan (talk) 08:21, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

His words do not mean that they are affiliated with ISIS. Brahim bmd (talk) 23:42, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

The leader of the group was smuggling weapons to ISIS in sinai JaxsonR (talk) 04:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

That does not suggest affiliation RossoSPC (talk) 13:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

As is well documented by references in the article, these terrorists are linked to ISIS, and just like ISIS, they support Israel. Pretending that they don't support Israel and aren't ISIS is absurd. URabinowitz (talk) 23:05, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

If ISIS support Israel, as you claim, who staged the massacre in Beersheba and terror on the streets of Hadera in 2022? 2A00:20:C013:A720:F5EE:BD30:5230:AD9B (talk) 06:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

That's not really an argument. Who did 911? People formerly supported by the US. Hamas itself was supported by Israel in the 80s to weaken PLO. It's called blowback (intelligence). FunkMonk (talk) 23:30, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Exactly brother. JaxsonR (talk) 05:08, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Many of the group's members were affiliated with the Islamic State's Sinai Province.

The group's members were either in prison or awaiting to receive the death penalty when the Gaza war broke out and many of them escaped from prison. Same thing goes for the Counter-Terrorism Strike Force. KashanAbbas (talk) 06:48, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Do have a source for this absurd claim..? JaxsonR (talk) 22:44, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

I just realized how absurd this claim is. KashanAbbas (talk) 13:14, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Give me a few days. I'll find a source. KashanAbbas (talk) 13:14, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

spreading lies

Liberman saying «Netanyahu is arming groups similar to ISIS in Gaza» became « Israel is arming ISIS » in the wikipedia Brahim bmd (talk) 12:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

@Brahim bmd Various media outlets cited in the article have called them "allegedly linked to ISIS". Hamas and some in Israel too. Hind242 (talk) 12:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

The lie started with the distortion of Liberman's statement. Brahim bmd (talk) 15:03, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Emblem AI generated?

I can't put this in the article yet as there aren't any sources describing it as such and that would be WP:OR, but I'm 99% sure the emblem is AI-generated. It has the distinct yellowish tone of many generations, there are strange visual artifacts near the keffiyeh's edge, and the Palestinian flag colors are in an illogical layout that doesn't make much sense if it was made by a human being.

Could someone take a look if anyone in Arabic-language communications pointed out yet that the emblem is generated by AI? If so, then it can be added to the article. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 16:43, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

https://ecfr.eu/special/mapping_palestinian_politics/popular-forces-gaza/

This website showes the logo of the Popular Forces. Qhairun (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

• shows.

Btw, the website was from ecfr.eu Qhairun (talk) 16:58, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm not doubting that this is the actual logo, I just believe whoever made it used AI and it should be reflected in the article if a reliable source points it out. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 17:18, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Even if it is AI generated as long as the group uses it as their logo does that matter? Denninithan (talk) 02:54, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Edit request 9 June 2025

Description of suggested change: I would probably request adding America's support for the Mujahideen back in the 1980s in the see also section regarding potential cases of blowback (as it is in a very similar vein to Israel's support of the predecessors of Hamas in the 1980s as a counterweight to the PLO)

Diff:

−

ORIGINAL_TEXT

+

CHANGED_TEXT

Testaccount13526 (talk) 04:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Which Wikipedia article are you specifically requesting be linked to? Also not sure that would necessarily fit on this article yet, would need to see some evidence that this is a similar situation first Cannolis (talk) 13:15, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 June 2025

Revert the change done by an unknown editor (62.4.44.195) who removed Israel from list of allies purposefully to vandalise the article TheBalanced (talk) 07:20, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

All 3 edits from that IP were undone >24 hours before your request. Not sure how you even saw them without seeing they were already reverted. Not to mention none of those 3 edits removed Israel from the list of allies. Cannolis (talk) 13:12, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

A new, related article on the actual conflict between Hamas and the PF?

Wondering if it would be a good idea for a "conflict article" to be made about the fighting between Hamas and the Popular Forces. Or perhaps not right now. Thoughts? Evaporation123 (talk) 02:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

that sounds good man, go for it. maybe we could split some of this article? JaxsonR (talk) 04:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

"PF-Hamas Conflict" ??? JaxsonR (talk) 04:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea its quite a notable event that they are fighting GothicGolem29 (talk) 23:56, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Then me and Denninithan could remove the Popular forces from the Salafi Jihadist insurgency page. JaxsonR (talk) 23:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Yeah if they have their own page for their conflict they could be removed from that page GothicGolem29 (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2025 (UTC)

Even with a new page on the Hamas–PF conflict, it's still a part of the broader salafi jihadist insurgency in gaza (allegedly), just the most recent incarnation of it. Evaporation123 (talk) 03:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I have made a draft for the page JaxsonR (talk) 03:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

I know, it doesn't change what I stated though. I'd strongly favor leaving in the PF in the Salafi jihadist insurgency in Gaza page, mentioning things like the Kerem Shalom looting, but going much more in detail on the draft. Evaporation123 (talk) 03:16, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

Seems like a good start for the page GothicGolem29 (talk) 12:25, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

The ideology

@Denninithan Would you please show me in the source (let's not even discuss how the JNS is not a WP:RS, for now) you're attributing the ideology of the group to where it says that they're secularist? I'm sure I have missed it — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 08:54, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

I gave the article a second read and it might be better to say they're "anti-hamas" and "anti-muslim brotherhood" rather than secularist.

Heres the quote: Yagur added that the Abu Shabab militia is “closer to Fatah and opposes Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Had they been ideologically affiliated with Hamas, they could not be trusted.” Denninithan (talk) 10:07, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

So you agree with the lede being like this? The quote you provided doesn't declare anything decisively about their ideology except them being anti-Hamas, you agree? — 🧀Cheesedealer ^!!!⚟ 10:39, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

yeah, my bad to be honest. Denninithan (talk) 20:42, 21 June 2025 (UTC)

Vote on a related page

Hello to all,

There is an ongoing vote on the talk page of Salafi jihadist insurgency in the Gaza Strip to determine whether the PF ought to be included as alleged participants. Participation in the vote to get some sort of consensus would be greatly appreciated. Evaporation123 (talk) 05:57, 30 June 2025 (UTC)

Flag

I have a source that shows the Popular Forces using a Palestinian flag: https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=122102099072875302&set=ecnf.61576259066682

(I know it's Facebook but its there official page) JaxsonR (talk) 17:05, 11 August 2025 (UTC)

Merge proposal (October 2025)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I propose merging Popular Forces administration in the Gaza Strip into Popular Forces. The administration article is very short, and its three paragraphs could easily become a subsection of the Popular Forces article. The administration article appears to be a misuse of the country infobox and dramatically describes the area as an "unrecognized autonomous administration" when in reality, it's a village under the partial control of a militia. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 16:45, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Oppose - Article covers a very recent creation, it will obviously be very short. Also, other proto-states and rebel-held areas use the infobox country. JaxsonR (talk) 06:46, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

@Evaporation123 just notifying you. JaxsonR (talk) 06:49, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Oppose, per @JaxsonR, plus the fact that Popular Forces is lengthy enough already and Popular Forces administration in the Gaza Strip pretty much has a different focus, how Abu Shabab is trying to legitimately build a rival government and such.

Also, the village of Al-Bayuk is only the PF headquarters, their territorial control extends beyond that. Evaporation123 (talk) 07:07, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Oppose, That'll be like merging the Donald Trump page with the United States page. Buddy731 (talk) 04:00, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

@Evaporation123 I do agree with removing "autonomous administration" but leaving the rest as is. JaxsonR (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

What alternative would you recommend? I came up with "autonomous administration" as a descriptive term. Evaporation123 (talk) 07:40, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

"Self-proclaimed rival government under Israeli-occupation" JaxsonR (talk) 17:54, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Sounds good, I say rival administration instead of government though. The PF hasnt formed one Evaporation123 (talk) 21:32, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. JaxsonR (talk) 01:02, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Oppose - One article describes a group, its origins, structure, etc. While the other covers the administration and governance of said group and how they manage populations under them and also how said group is able to have a functional society in populations and areas under its control. KashanAbbas (talk) 06:25, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Support - Supports Merging into main page Popular Forces as this page contains redundant information اقبال کا شاہین (talk) 07:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Wait - As it's relating to current events that are still ongoing, it is too early to tell if the article content would be able to merge or not. We have no idea if the group will dissipate in the near future, or stay long term in future governance, in which case the two articles would get very expansive and should not merge. TeddyRoosevelt1912 (talk) 01:33, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

Compromise? - if we can't reach an agreement on what should be what, What if we added a small introduction for the PF administration but link it to the article for the Popular Forces administration in the Gaza Strip?

What I mean is that i'll go like this:

== Administration within the Gaza Strip ==

Main article: Popular Forces administration in the Gaza Strip

The Popular Forces have administered parts of the Gaza Strip occupied by the IDF where 2,000 Palestinian civilians live in. This is the first time since 2007 where a party other then Hamas has taken over the role of governing the aforementioned strip of land.

(I know the introduction was pretty unprofessional, not wikipedia-like, and overall sucked, but I meant to only to use it as an example to use for the article and I bet that someone could make something much more better.)

GuesanLoyalist (talk) 03:07, 22 October 2025 (UTC)

I agree with this, should be more than just a blue link in the intro text. JaxsonR (talk) 17:15, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Technically not a compromise since it assumes there are two articles (so not merging), but I do agree this is the best way to format the information given the ongoing situation TeddyRoosevelt1912 (talk) 20:01, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ideology section the the infobox

I think a ideology section in the infobox would be good, the Popular Forces got described as Salafi Jihadist after this source https://www.middleeasteye.net/explainers/popular-forces-who-are-gangsters-being-armed-israel , not to forget that there are alleged claims that it's affiliated with the IS or Fatah, which would probably means the embrace Islamic Statism or the ideology of Fatah. 2A02:3100:2FA3:FF00:14FB:70A6:A860:4415 (talk) 23:19, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Wrong and misleading link

Hello, @TheJoebro64. I noticed that you had linked the Counter-Terrorism Strike Force as the military wing of the Popular Forces which is incorrect. The source does not mention the CSF but it does mention a military wing. JaxsonR (talk) 20:38, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

That was added by someone else, not me. I'll revert it. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 20:52, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad. Thank you. JaxsonR (talk) 21:44, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

Popular Forces' Military Wing

According to this source the military wing of the Popular Forces is the "Counter Terrorism Service" not to be confused with the Counter-Terrorism Strike Force. A logo can also be seen below.

This should be mentioned in other parts of the article and not just the UAE-links section. JaxsonR (talk) 21:46, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

This should be added to the allied groups section. JaxsonR (talk) 18:53, 21 October 2025 (UTC)

Logo created by Ai?

Logo used for Popular Forces in the article looks like it was created by generative ai, it has that shade of colouring that you see on images that are created by ai. Mind someone take a better look? Wikicommonsfan134 (talk) 09:52, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

That's what I thought as well. I think we should replace it with something else. Urbicapus (talk) 12:12, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

This is discussed above. The logo is sourced from the ecfr and therefore should be acceptable. It is likely AI as you've pointed out but that doesn't inherently mean it isn't their logo. Salmon Of Ignorance (talk) 16:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

An addition to the infobox

Please the following to the info box:
| blank1_title = Designated as terror group by | blank1 = Hamas Government of the Gaza Strip

~2025-40577-31 (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2025-40577-31  Done KashanAbbas (talk) 14:26, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

@KashanAbbas Please also add this:

| blank3 =

• Popular Army – Northern Forces
• Popular Army in Rafah (Free Homeland Forces)
• Popular Defense Forces – Khalil al-Wazir Battalion

| blank3_title = Subgroups ~2026-31602-5 (talk) 13:32, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-31602-5  Done KashanAbbas (talk) 07:47, 20 January 2026 (UTC)