As West Asia stands at a crossroads, the assassination of a key negotiator like Haniyeh serves as a grim reminder of the fragility of peace efforts
By Iftikhar Gilani
In the shadowy world of international espionage and conflict, few incidents possess the power to derail delicate diplomacy as dramatically as a high-profile assassination.
The recent killing of Ismail Haniyeh, the political chief of a Palestine resistance organization in Tehran, represents such a moment—a seismic event that has thrust the precarious peace process in the Middle East into a tailspin.
For decades, Israel’s security agencies have engaged in a targeted assassination strategy, pursuing adversaries far beyond their borders, from Beirut to Paris.
The history of these operations reveals a pattern of relentless pursuit, starting with the killing of an Egyptian military attaché in Jordan in 1956.
Over the years, Israeli operatives have eliminated at least 60 adversaries outside their national borders.
However, none have had an impact comparable to the recent assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran, alongside the simultaneous strike that claimed the life of Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut.
The repercussions of Haniyeh’s death are profound. Known as a moderate voice within his organization, his involvement was crucial in the ongoing negotiations aimed at achieving a lasting ceasefire.
His assassination has not only left a leadership vacuum but has also significantly complicated the mediation efforts, with crucial stakeholders like Qatar and Egypt vocally condemning the act.
The Qatari Prime Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, and Egypt’s foreign ministry have both highlighted the assassination as a severe blow to the peace talks, marking it as a “dangerous escalation” by Israel.
The strategic implications of these assassinations are not lost on observers.
Eran Etzion, a former Israeli official, suggested that the motive behind such actions might be to derail the peace process intentionally. This view is compounded by concerns about a broader Israeli strategy to provoke a larger conflict, potentially drawing in Iranian retaliation and escalating into a wider regional war.
The structure of the ceasefire plan itself, now hanging by a thread, was meticulously designed to unfold in multiple phases.
The first phase demanded an immediate ceasefire and the safe return of Palestinians to their homes. The subsequent phases involved more permanent solutions, including the cessation of hostilities and a comprehensive reconstruction plan for Gaza. The assassination has cast a long shadow over these plans, with U.S. President Biden previously lauding the deal as a crucial step towards a “durable end to the war.”
Haniyeh’s trajectory from a displaced family in Gaza to a significant political figure underscored his unique role in the peace negotiations.
His pragmatic approach to diplomacy stood in stark contrast to the more hardline factions within his organization, making his loss all the more significant. His assassination is viewed not merely as the loss of a leader but as a strategic blow to the entire peace process.
Israel’s approach to counterinsurgency, marked by targeted killings, mirrors a broader doctrine shared with the United States, albeit with significant differences from strategies employed by other nations like the United Kingdom and India.
The British method, which focused on weakening the enemy’s resolve through attacking aides of the leader and choking funds and arms supplies was also adopted by India till a few years ago. It was understood that the killing of leaders fragments groups and then one has to deal with several groups. Also, it also throws up the hardline leadership as has happened in the case of Hamas.
Following the assassination of Haniyeh the 50-member Shura Council of Hamas representing Gaza, the West Bank, the diaspora, and Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails appointed Yahya Ibrahim Hassan al-Sinwar, as its head.
Sinwar, who spent 23 years in Israeli prisons before his 2011 release in a prisoner swap for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, has been a target of multiple Israeli assassination plots.
Notably, during the 2021 Israeli–Palestinian conflict, known as the Intifada of Unity by Palestinians and Operation Guardians of the Walls by Israelis, the Israeli domestic intelligence agency Shin Bet sought permission to eliminate him. His leadership during this period was marked by a striking image of him amidst Gaza’s devastation, symbolising his rising prominence.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, while pursuing peace agreements with Arab states through the Abraham Accords, reportedly opposed Sinwar’s elimination. Analysts suggest that Netanyahu’s reluctance stemmed from a strategic aim to weaken the Palestinian Authority and the secular Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) by empowering Sinwar’s Islamist resistance group.
This move was seen as a tactic to prevent Arab leaders from insisting on Palestinian inclusion in negotiations.
Netanyahu has killed many birds with one stone by ordering the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran. He has disrupted ongoing US-backed ceasefire talks mediated by Egypt and Qatar, by eliminating moderate face within Hamas and also prolonging his stay in power. By killing Hamas’s leader in Tehran, he also made sure that rapprochement between the West and Iran was delayed.
Analysts criticise this as a breach of unwritten conflict management rules, arguing that eliminating moderates like Haniyeh undermines prospects for peace by empowering hardliners within the Palestinian resistance.
Osama Hamdan, a senior Palestine resistance official, expressed frustration with the stalled ceasefire talks, attributing the deadlock not to leadership changes but to Israel’s and the US’s failure to secure an agreement.
Meanwhile, mediators in Cairo and Doha are struggling to engage with Sinwar, who operates from hiding in Gaza, unlike his predecessors Haniyeh and Khalid Mashal, who were more visible in diplomatic circles.
Sinwar’s leadership represents a shift towards a more defiant stance against Israel.
Born in 1962 in the Khan Yunis refugee camp, his early life and subsequent involvement in the Palestinian cause, including his conviction for the kidnapping and murder of Israeli soldiers, have shaped his resilience and strategic acumen. His recent orchestration of a significant military deception on October 7, 2023, highlights his tactical prowess.
Globally, Sinwar is viewed through a polarised lens. While designated a terrorist by the US and the EU, his supporters see him as a symbol of Palestinian resistance and self-determination. His role continues to shape the dynamics of regional politics and international diplomacy, making him a central figure in the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Sinwar’s influence, whether seen as heroic or villainous, underscores his pivotal role in one of the world’s most enduring conflicts, embodying the complex nature of West Asian geopolitics.
Amidst these complex dynamics, the rise of Masoud Pezeshkian as Iran’s new president on July 30th adds another layer to the regional puzzle.
Pezeshkian, known for his reformist leanings and diverse ethnic background, represents a potential shift in Iran’s approach to both domestic policy and international relations. His election signalled a more accommodating stance in a region fraught with tension, offering a glimmer of hope for those advocating for diplomatic resolutions to longstanding conflicts. But the Hamas leader’s assassination on his soil has now tied his hands.
As West Asia stands at a crossroads, the assassination of a key negotiator like Haniyeh serves as a grim reminder of the fragility of peace efforts. The region remains a chessboard, with each move by national leaders and external powers potentially altering the course of history. The path forward requires not only strategic acumen but a genuine commitment to peace that transcends political manoeuvring—an endeavour more urgent now than ever in the quest for stability and harmony in the Middle East.
####
