AT PENPOINT
The killing of Hamas Politbureau chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, presumably by Israel, has not been claimed as its work, raises a vast array of questions, while at the same time answering a few.
Perhaps the most salient feature of the murder is that it came right after the signing of the Beijing Declaration by a number of Palestinian organizations, including Hamas. Previous talks between Hamas and Al-Fatah have been about the holding of fresh elections (the last were in 2006, and both the Palestinian Liberation Organization and Hamas, cannot claim that their mandates are particularly recent.)
It should be noted that this massacre by Israel is something the Netanyahu government seems committed to, even as it embarrasses Israel’s supporters the world over. The first thing that the war does is keep Netanyahu in office, and thus helps block his ongoing prosecution for corruption,
The USA was motivated to sign off on a move meant primarily to save a sleazebag from his just, deserts because Haniyeh was supporting something, the Beijing Declaration, which it wanted, but which it did not want Beijing to deliver. The USA is as concerned as anyone about the shape of apost-invasion Gaza, and it would like it to be governed by the Palestinian Authority which governs the West Bank with the Hamas ousted.
One requirement would be an agreement among Palestinian groups to work together for that goal. However, China managing that reconciliation means it is doing what the USA could not do. There are two reasons why this is particularly galling for the USA. First, there is its antipathy to China because of their global rivalry. Then there is its intervention in the Middle East, an area in which it has recently begun to take an interest, with a major recent success being its successful mediation between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
China is interested in the Middle East for the same reason the USA is, oil. However, the USA has made Israel the cornerpiece of its strategy, but China is not committed to it. China is bumping up against the USA of late, one important example being its taking the side of the USSR in its invasion of Ukraine. Its being aligned with the USSR and the Central Asian Republics makes a certain sense because of its One Belt One Road initiative, and the New Silk Road plan.
However, central to its vision is a guaranteed source of oil from Saudi Arabia as well as Iran. It does not want to end up like Russia if the Taiwan situation leaves it facing US sanctions. Its access to Middle East oil dovetails with its need to secure the Indian Ocean and China Sea routes which allow it access. That is what makes CPEC so important: then the oil only needs to get to Gwadar before landing onto a secure route to China.
Surprisingly, India is also involved in the matter. It has begun to function as the USA’s main catspaw in the region, and particularly against China. At the same time, India is also deeply interested in the Middle East, primarily because of the oil there. It must be remembered that for the first time, a power, perhaps even a superpower, is getting involved in the Middle East which does not have a significant Jewish population. The USSR was generally opposed to Israel because of its own direct ties to the Palestine Liberation Organization and to the Arab states like Egypt and Syria. (Even now, the only naval base of Russia outside its territory is in Syria.)
India has a historic link to the Palestinian cause, but the link between the PLO and the Congress Party has been reversed under the BJP. which initiated relations with Israel when Morarji Desai was PM and had Atal Bihari Vajpayee as his Foreign Minister. India and Israel realised that they both had to deal with a large an intractable Muslim minority, and it is to be noticed that they have been following essentially the same policy in dealing with them. India in particular has shown in Indian Occupied Kashmir that it has been an apt pupil of Israel, both in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Israel no longer appears in control of events. It has faced unprecedented criticism for its tactics, including from the International Court of Justice. It does have the backing of the USA, with the current Administration vying with Congress to prove a greater degree of support for Israel. Haniyeh’s assassination may be a further stage in Israel’s deline. It certainly didn’t bring a victory of any kind any closer.
One of the responses has been the election of Yahya Shinwar as Haniyeh’s successor as Chairman of the Hamas Political Bureau. Shinwar is the same age as Haniyeh, and like him is a product of the Gaza refugee camps. Their families became refugees after fleeing from the same town, Ashkelon, in what is now Israel. Both he and Haniyeh took degrees in Arabic literature from the Gaza Islamic University, and both had been jailed by the Israelis, Haniyeh thrice for short periods, Shinwar for v22 years between 1989 and 2011, until he was released in a prisoner exchange. He was presently headed of Hamas in Gaza, and is said to be responsible for the October 7 attacks which have provoked Israel into its ‘final solution
Shinwar has been described by Israel as a ‘dead man walking’, and it is possible that Israel will have him assassinated. It has already had Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, the founder of Hamas, assassinated. Sh Yassin was a paraplegic, left paralyzed from neck down after a boyhood wrestling accident. He was from Aske; on originally, like Haniyeh’s and Shinwar’s families.
The lessons from the assassinations are that even Tehran is not safe. It may be noted that while Haniyeh was in Qatar, where he had been since 2017, he was safe. Qatar is not just a player in the oil world, but is one of the biggest holders of gas in the world.
Tehran should be really concerned. That a hostile agency, presumably Mossad, could put together an operation against someone who was a visitor (Haniyeh was in Tehran only for new President Msoud Pezeshkian), would not encourage visitors to Tehran. Would Netanyahu have gone on his recent Washington sojourn if his tea, had suspected that he could be picked off? More significantly, it would indicate that prominent Iranian figures, including Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Pezeshkian, are at risk. Mossad has a history of targeting Iranian nuclear acientists, and it is possible that when the Iranian nuclear programme reaches a certain stage, Mossad may strike at decision-makers rather than scientists. Haniyeh’s killing showed the decision might not be changed, but some delay has been imposed.
Israel’s intentions i Gaza seems murky, perhaps because because Israel might have realized that it hasno clear war aims. Actually, by engaging in an attack itself without clear aims, Hamas imposed this lack of clarity on Israel. Hamas seems to have had a motive rather than an aim, that of making the Palestinian cause once again prominent, from the hijackings of the early 1970s, and the 1872 Munich Olympics massacre, to the 1990s India when Haniyeh and Shinwar cut their teeth.
Israel no longer appears in control of events. It has faced unprecedented criticism for its tactics, including from the International Court of Justice. It does have the backing of the USA, with the current Administration vying with Congress to prove a greater degree of support for Israel. Haniyeh’s assassination may be a further stage in Israel’s deline. It certainly didn’t bring a victory of any kind any closer.
