Hamas chief assassinated – what happens next?

3 months ago 2

ARTICLE AD BOX

The death of Ismail Haniyeh is a challenge to Iran and other members of the anti-Israeli ‘Axis of Resistance’

The last few days of July were exceptionally hot in the Middle East, and not because of the weather, but due to the escalating regional conflict that grows more intense by the day.

Following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the US, where he spoke in Congress and met with high-ranking officials, many experts speculated that Israel had received a “green light” to launch full-scale military action against the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah.

On July 27, a rocket landed on a soccer field in the village of Majdal Shams, located in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, where Druze Arabs live. Twelve children were killed and 60 other people injured. Netanyahu returned home early, and a series of official Israeli statements claimed that Hezbollah had launched the rocket, which was allegedly of Iranian manufacture, and that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) would respond powerfully. Hezbollah, however, denied any involvement in the attack. Lebanese authorities suggested that the rocket was actually an Israeli air defense missile. Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Ministry described the incident as a “staged drama.” There was indeed a sense that events were unfolding as if orchestrated, yet it was impossible to confirm who was behind the attack.

On the evening of July 30, the IDF launched a strike on the outskirts of Beirut, calling it a “targeted assassination” operation against one of Hezbollah’s military leaders, Fuad Shukr, who was allegedly responsible for the attack on Majdal Shams. Over 75 people were injured and about ten were killed. Such strikes on the Lebanese capital by Israel are not uncommon; earlier this year, another Israeli attack killed Saleh al-Arouri, the deputy head of Hamas’s political bureau. The assassination of Fuad Shukr, a key aide to Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, heightened tensions, but it seemed unlikely to lead to a full-scale conflict between Lebanon and Israel.

Read more

However, on the night of July 31, shocking news broke about the assassination of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh, who had traveled to Tehran for the inauguration of its newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, and a meeting with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. By the following day, Hamas officials confirmed that “Haniyeh was killed in a treacherous Zionist raid on his residence in Tehran.”

This incident indeed marked a crossing of the Rubicon, as Haniyeh was a key negotiator for Hamas in ceasefire talks in Gaza involving the US, Israel, Egypt, Qatar, and Hamas. The location of the attack – the capital of the Islamic Republic of Iran – further complicates the situation, as Tehran, despite its reluctance to become fully embroiled in a regional conflict, now finds itself compelled to respond to maintain its reputation and prevent similar incidents in the future.

Undoubtedly, many countries condemned the assassination of Haniyeh. Iranian officials, including Supreme Leader Khamenei and President Pezeshkian, strongly denounced the killing, labeling Israel a “criminal and terrorist regime” and promising severe consequences. Russia also condemned the act, describing it as an unacceptable political assassination that would adversely affect ceasefire negotiations in Gaza. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the Lebanese group Hezbollah expressed their condolences, with Abbas calling for Palestinian unity. The leader of the Houthis in Yemen called it a crime that undermines the fragile peace in the region. China expressed concern over the potential destabilization of the region, while Egypt highlighted the lack of political will to de-escalate the situation. Qatar’s prime minister, who had been mediating negotiations between Israel and Hamas, noted that the assassination jeopardizes the success of the talks. Turkey also condemned the attack, claiming that it was aimed at spreading the conflict to a broader regional scale.

It is no secret that the current Israeli government has taken a strong stance against anti-Israeli forces in the region, represented by the ‘Axis of Resistance’. Firstly, this aims to reduce the threat to Israel’s national security. Secondly, it helps Netanyahu and his ministers to maintain power and strengthen their positions, which have been weakened by internal political crises and public dissatisfaction with current policies. Thirdly, it clearly shows the Israeli far-right forces’ determination to eliminate the Palestinian resistance movement and prevent the creation of a Palestinian state. On July 18, the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) overwhelmingly voted in favor of a resolution rejecting the creation of such a state. The resolution stated, “The Knesset of Israel firmly opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River. The creation of such a state in the heart of the land of Israel would pose a threat to the existence of the state of Israel and its citizens, perpetuate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and destabilize the region.”

Another significant reason behind the Netanyahu government’s decision to take this internationally contentious action is the agreement reached among Palestinian factions to form a national unity government, achieved in Beijing. In this government, Hamas, and Ismail Haniyeh in particular, could have played a significant role. The assassination of Haniyeh can be seen as a form of retribution by Israel for the Palestinians’ success in overcoming the resistance of West Jerusalem and its Western allies to Hamas’ participation in the new Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) structures. By eliminating Haniyeh, Israel sent a message to all Palestinian groups about the potential consequences they could face.

Read more

While Netanyahu may not have received full carte blanche from the US to launch a campaign in Lebanon, he seems intent on provoking Iran and Hezbollah into retaliatory actions that could justify an Israeli invasion. The assassination of Haniyeh could exacerbate the situation in Lebanon, especially in light of the recent Israeli strike on Beirut and the death of Fuad Shukr. This event is likely to lead to coordinated actions by Hezbollah and Iran in possible retaliation against Israel, increasing the risk of clashes with Israeli forces in Lebanon, as well as with Iran and other groups within the ‘Axis of Resistance.’

In this situation, it will be difficult for Washington to object, and the US will likely have to continue providing military aid to Israel. Moreover, the US cannot officially condemn Israel for the assassination of Haniyeh, as it had previously suggested that the IDF focus on eliminating Hamas leaders rather than conducting carpet bombings and street battles in Gaza. However, this situation also poses a threat to American forces in the region, as responsibility for Haniyeh’s death could also be attributed to the US. ‘Axis of Resistance’ groups in Syria and Iraq may resume attacks on American military installations, leading to a new level of escalation.

Furthermore, Haniyeh’s assassination intensifies tensions in the Middle East and could undermine the prospects for progress in ceasefire negotiations in the Gaza Strip. Prior to Haniyeh’s death, it was believed that Israel and Hamas were close to reaching an agreement to halt the conflict, which has claimed 40,000 lives and caused a humanitarian crisis. Haniyeh was an active participant in negotiations mediated by Egypt, Qatar, and the US, and there had been recent reports of progress despite disagreements. However, Israel has begun to present new conditions unacceptable to the Palestinians. It is now clear that Netanyahu has chosen an escalatory path, hoping to place the blame for withdrawing from negotiations on Hamas, likely causing Palestinian resistance to stop discussing a ceasefire.

The escalation poses a threat of retaliatory actions not only from Hamas and Hezbollah but also from Iran, especially considering the assassination of Haniyeh took place in its territory, which serves as a challenge to the Islamic Republic, to which Tehran cannot fail to respond. This incident has already caused a negative reaction, surpassing the fallout after the killing of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) officers in Damascus by Israelis.

The situation is further complicated by Iran’s failure to protect its ally’s leader in its own capital, causing alarm within Iranian society and prompting a review of security measures. Iranian authorities have already convened an emergency meeting of the Supreme National Security Council, stating that the Israeli attack will lead to retaliatory actions from Iran-supported groups in the ‘Axis of Resistance’. The ability of Israel to target top Iranian leaders and their guests represents a serious challenge.

Read more

Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Bashar al-Assad.

As for Hamas itself, significant changes are unlikely. Haniyeh’s death leaves Musa Abu Marzouk, Khaled Mashaal, Basem Naim, Hussam Badran, and Yahya Sinwara, who, according to the IDF, planned the operation to invade Israel on October 7. Some sources suggest that Khaled Mashal may become the next head of the political bureau. Therefore, decapitating the resistance will not work; instead, forceful measures will only lead to further radicalization of Hamas and other PLO movements, as Israel’s actions have demonstrated that the current leaders of the Jewish state do not wish to see a Palestinian state.

In conclusion, the situation in the Middle East, particularly regarding the conflict between Israel and the ‘Axis of Resistance’, including Hezbollah and Hamas, has reached a new level of tension. The assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran was not only a serious blow to Hamas but also a challenge to Iran, significantly increasing the risk of further escalation. The lack of progress in ceasefire negotiations and growing regional tensions suggest a potential intensification of military actions. While the international community condemns these actions, internal political and strategic motives seem to outweigh the desire for peace. In this worsening situation, it is crucial for all parties to make efforts to avoid a full-scale conflict, the consequences of which could be catastrophic for the entire region.

Read Entire Article