From the Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas” comes everything that is surprising and everything that is unexpected. In addition to the earthquake of October 7, and the shock of the legendary steadfastness, the movement is once again transporting the world to another shock, which did not occur to the guardians of political analysis and those who foresee the future and its outcomes, nor did it cross the imagination of the most experienced and professional intelligence agencies in the world.
Black box
While there were almost certain expectations that the movement had settled on Khaled Meshaal as a “possible” successor to Ismail Haniyeh, who was assassinated in Tehran last week, its decision to choose Sinwar once again shakes confidence in the myths that have relegated the Israeli security establishment – and the American one, of course – to the status of being able to count the breaths of any political leadership in the world.
The vessels and channels for sorting and selecting the head of the movement’s political bureau are not a complex process, and do not take place on the narrowest map, in a way that makes it a “political priesthood” fenced in with secrecy and protection from being seen. The selection is decided by Hamas’s Shura Council, which consists of 50 members, and is an advisory body composed of officials elected by Hamas members in four branches: Gaza, the West Bank, the diaspora, and security prisoners in Israeli prisons.
It is, then, a vast mosaic and vulnerable to security breaches. However, it remained, like the Gaza tunnels, a black box that is difficult to monitor, eavesdrop, and illuminate its dark spaces. Meanwhile, Tel Aviv is considered the largest producer and exporter of espionage technology in the world. It is also considered the first spy state, from which even its main ally, the United States of America, was not spared when it placed mobile phone monitoring devices near the White House and other sensitive locations throughout Washington, according to what Politico revealed on 12/9/2019.
Choice puzzle
No one in the world, shocked by the surprise of the Hamas alternative, can yet offer an approach that explains the mystery of the choice and its significance regarding the decision to transfer the official center of Hamas authority to Gaza, while many of the official leaders have been at large abroad in recent years – including Haniyeh and Khaled Meshaal – and under unofficial “customary” protection or immunity, as they are the political mediator in any negotiations between the two sides: the Israeli and the Palestinian.
Naming Sinwar as head of the political bureau means transferring the political decision, including the future of the “negotiations” later on.. from the moderate political leadership “Haniyeh” – as observers and those who dealt with him closely described him as a polished and practical negotiator – to the highest military and field official “Sinwar”, who Israel places at the top of the “assassination list”. This puts Netanyahu before the most serious question that must be asked. on him Answering it regarding: Who can be contacted from the Palestinians regarding the deal to release Israeli prisoners?!
Sinwar is a secret, “ghostly” figure, and the only thing known about him, according to the BBC, is that he is a man with “snow-white hair and black eyebrows”! In a sarcastic reference to the state of chaos left behind by Netanyahu’s whims and his “propaganda” adventure of assassinating the public mediator Ismail Haniyeh.
Especially since the Israeli government’s assessment of Sinwar during his time in prison – he spent 23 years – was that he was a character “ Tough, reliable, influential, with extraordinary powers of endurance, cunning and manipulative, content with little… keeps secrets even within prison among other prisoners… and has the ability to mobilize and rally.
In addition, while in prison, he learned Hebrew and developed an understanding of Israeli culture and society, according to fellow former prisoners and Israeli officials who monitored him in prison.
Many Israeli and American officials believe that Sinwar took advantage of the understanding of Israel he gained during his long years of detention to sow societal divisions in Israel, manipulate Netanyahu and embarrass him before Israeli public opinion.
Zero sum
The shock of the choice led a faction within the Israeli security establishment to believe that Haniyeh’s assassination was a “zero-sum” in terms of operational reality, politically and militarily. After the official announcement of Sinwar’s appointment, Michael Milstein, a former Israeli intelligence officer specializing in Palestinian affairs, said: “His status was elevated to a symbolic level.” “But in the end, he was indeed the one who made the decision regarding the war and the negotiations.”
What is striking in the scene following the “Sinwar earthquake” is the confusion that struck the Israeli political leadership, which was long late in commenting on Netanyahu’s situation face to face with the architect of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” that led to the killing of 1,200 Israelis, the capture of nearly 250 others, the shaking of the history of the Israeli security establishment, and the undermining of confidence in the “invincible army.”
The first official Israeli reaction was nervous, tense, and lacked diplomatic prudence and sobriety, as stated by Foreign Minister Israel Katz, who called on Tuesday evening for the “swift liquidation” of Yahya Sinwar. He wrote on the “X” platform: “The appointment of Sinwar as head of Hamas, succeeding Ismail Haniyeh, is an additional reason to quickly liquidate him and wipe this organization off the map.”
These are statements that Hugh Lovatt, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, ridiculed, believing that killing Sinwar would be more of a “public relations victory” for Israel than an actual impact on the movement.
“Obviously it will be a loss, but he will be replaced, and there are structures in place to do that,” he said. “It’s not like killing Bin Laden, there are other senior political and military leaders within Hamas.”
Indeed, experience has repeatedly shown that NGOs tend to operate on the same theory of “decapitating the hydra.”
Incidentally, this is a theory developed by Israeli researcher Danny Brogovich, and it can be expressed in another way (cutting the weeds): whenever one of its nine heads is cut off, two new ones grow in its place. If the operations commander or figurehead is assassinated, he is quickly replaced by another, and sometimes his successor lacks the same experience or credibility, but the organization is often strong and able to renew itself in one way or another.
The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera Network.
