Ismail Haniyeh, the pragmatic and diplomatic face of Hamas, has been killed in an overnight strike in Tehran.
Hamas has attributed the incident to Israel, and this could introduce a new and dangerous phase in the ongoing conflict between Israel and the militant group. Although, Israel has not officially claimed responsibility.
Haniyeh’s assassination is a major blow to Hamas, both strategically and symbolically, removing its most visible leader who orchestrated the group’s political operations from abroad.
The death of Haniyeh marks the second high-profile assassination of an Iran-backed leader within 24 hours, following the killing of Hezbollah’s senior military commander in Lebanon.
These back-to-back assassinations portend a serious escalation in the conflict, amplifying fears of an all-out war in the Middle East.
In an official statement, Hamas condemned the killing of Haniyeh and his bodyguard in a targeted “strike” on their residence in Tehran.
The timing of the attack is particularly notable as Haniyeh had just attended the inauguration of Iran’s new president, Masoud Pezeshkian, the previous day.
Iranian state media IRNA reported that the strike occurred around 2 a.m. local time, involving an “airborne guided projectile.”
Although Israel has maintained its policy of ambiguity regarding such operations, it did confirm a strike in Beirut that killed Hezbollah commander Fu’ad Shukr. This action was framed as a response to a recent deadly attack in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.
Israel’s military stated that it was “conducting a situational assessment,” highlighting its ongoing commitment to dismantling Hamas and Hezbollah leadership.
Israel’s broader strategy appears to be aimed at disrupting the leadership of these groups to weaken their operational capabilities. At the start of the Gaza war Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, made it clear that Isreal would go after the leaders of Hamas wherever they were both inside Gaza and out.
The assassination of Haniyeh, in particular, could have profound implications for Hamas’ political and diplomatic endeavours.
His death removes a central figure who played a crucial role in ceasefire negotiations and international diplomacy, potentially stalling any progress towards a truce.
Haniyeh was deeply involved in mediation efforts with Qatar and Egypt, working towards a potential truce that now seems increasingly elusive.
Qatar’s Prime Minister, Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, a mediator in the talks, expressed grave concerns over the assassination. He questioned the feasibility of successful mediation when a principal negotiator has been targeted, stressing the broader implications for peace efforts in the region.
The deaths of Haniyeh and Shukr have intensified fears of a broader regional conflict.
Brigadier General (Res.) Assaf Orion, a senior researcher at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, noted that these assassinations increase the likelihood of a coordinated response from Iran and its proxies.
Iran has long invested in regional proxy groups, collectively known as the “Axis of Resistance,” supplying them with financial and military support to bolster its influence across the Middle East.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei condemned the assassination, declaring it a duty to avenge Haniyeh’s death, as it occurred on Iranian soil.
This rhetoric points up the heightened state of tension and the potential for further violence in the region.
The international community has also reacted to Haniyeh’s assassination with concern.
The White House acknowledged reports of his death but refrained from immediate comment. While traveling in the Philippines, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin stated that he does not believe war in the Middle East is inevitable, but assured that the United States would support Israel if it were attacked.
Haniyeh’s death poses momentous challenges for Hamas. As a central figure in both political and diplomatic spheres, his absence leaves a gap that will be difficult to fill.
Historically, Hamas has managed to continue its operations despite the loss of key leaders, but the symbolic weight of Haniyeh’s assassination may impact the group’s morale and strategic direction.
Haniyeh’s leadership style, marked by pragmatism and diplomacy, distinguished him within Hamas.
He was instrumental in engaging with international mediators and played a crucial role in hostage and ceasefire talks.
His willingness to negotiate, even in the face of personal tragedy, showcased his commitment to the group’s broader objectives.
In April, Israeli airstrikes killed three of Haniyeh’s sons and four of his grandchildren, yet he remained steadfast in his negotiations, insisting that these personal losses would not deter Hamas from pursuing its demands.
Ismail Haniyeh, 62, was born in a refugee camp near Gaza City and joined Hamas during the First Intifada in the late 1980s. His rise through the ranks culminated in his appointment to a secret “collective leadership” in 2004, and by 2017, he became the chief of Hamas.
Haniyeh’s leadership was marked by his efforts to balance militant activities with political diplomacy, earning him recognition as a “specially designated global terrorist” by the U.S. shortly after his appointment as chief.
Over the years, Haniyeh engaged in peace talks with notable figures, including former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, and met with various world leaders. His diplomatic efforts were aimed at gaining international legitimacy for Hamas, though these efforts were often met with resistance due to the group’s militant actions.
As the region grapples with the fallout from these high-profile killings, the potential for further violence and instability looms large, making the pursuit of peace more critical and challenging than ever.
