Behind Sinwar’s Selection: Internal, Regional, and Israeli Factors

Yahya Sinwar participating in a previous march in support of Al-Aqsa Mosque in Gaza City (AFP)
Yahya Sinwar participating in a previous march in support of Al-Aqsa Mosque in Gaza City (AFP)
TT
20

Behind Sinwar’s Selection: Internal, Regional, and Israeli Factors

Yahya Sinwar participating in a previous march in support of Al-Aqsa Mosque in Gaza City (AFP)
Yahya Sinwar participating in a previous march in support of Al-Aqsa Mosque in Gaza City (AFP)

Sources familiar with the internal discussions that led to the selection of Yahya Sinwar as the new leader of Hamas in Gaza revealed several key factors behind his appointment.
Sinwar succeeded Ismail Haniyeh, who was assassinated by Israel in Tehran. Sinwar’s own ambitions, Khaled Meshaal's decision to step aside, and strategic considerations involving Israel and regional dynamics were all influential in this decision.
Hamas unanimously chose Sinwar in a decisive meeting on Tuesday after two days of discussions.
Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that most Hamas leaders abroad, including those from Gaza, the West Bank, and members of the political bureau and Shura Council based in Lebanon, Türkiye, and Qatar, participated in these crucial meetings and supported Sinwar’s appointment.
Initially, Sinwar’s name was not proposed right after Haniyeh’s assassination. The focus was on appointing Khaled Meshaal as a temporary leader until the Gaza conflict ended.
However, Meshaal declined due to health issues and unspecified pressures related to various foreign relations. Some noted that Meshaal was seen as more aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood than with Iran.
Sources revealed that Hamas aimed to send several clear messages with Sinwar’s appointment.
The main message was defiance towards Israel, showing unity within Hamas and dismissing any internal conflicts, including the October 7 attack, which Sinwar and Qassam Brigades leader Mohammed Deif masterminded.
This move also signals a return of leadership to the battlefield and reaffirms Hamas’ role in the Iran-led “axis of resistance.”
Sources, who requested anonymity, stated that Sinwar’s selection was primarily a response to the assassination of Haniyeh.
“The key message to Netanyahu and Israel is that by killing Haniyeh, a negotiator willing to make concessions to stop the war, you now face Sinwar, your primary enemy and a war instigator. If Israel’s government wants to continue the conflict, this is our reply,” explained the sources.
Additionally, the sources mentioned that truce negotiations are now in Sinwar’s hands, meaning Israel must negotiate with him. They also confirmed that with Sinwar’s appointment, the decision was made to resume ceasefire talks in Gaza, with Sinwar personally overseeing them.
Other factors behind Sinwar’s selection involve Hamas’s external situation and its relationships with various countries.
“One reason was to ease the immense pressure on the external leadership from mediators and host countries to expel Hamas leaders. Shifting decision-making to Gaza reduces these pressures,” a source, who asked to remain anonymous, told Asharq Al-Awsat.
“It’s easier to assassinate someone abroad, so choosing a leader from Gaza is the best option to handle the movement’s external challenges. It’s unclear if Sinwar’s appointment will succeed, as some countries welcomed it while others remained silent,” the source explained.
Meanwhile, Israel has vowed to kill Sinwar, using his appointment to justify military control over Gaza and the West Bank.

 



Red Cross Concerned by Drone Attacks on Critical Infrastructure in Sudan

People collect food at a location set up by a local humanitarian organization to donate meals and medication to people displaced by the war in Sudan, in Meroe in the country's Northern State, on January 9, 2025. (Photo by AFP)
People collect food at a location set up by a local humanitarian organization to donate meals and medication to people displaced by the war in Sudan, in Meroe in the country's Northern State, on January 9, 2025. (Photo by AFP)
TT
20

Red Cross Concerned by Drone Attacks on Critical Infrastructure in Sudan

People collect food at a location set up by a local humanitarian organization to donate meals and medication to people displaced by the war in Sudan, in Meroe in the country's Northern State, on January 9, 2025. (Photo by AFP)
People collect food at a location set up by a local humanitarian organization to donate meals and medication to people displaced by the war in Sudan, in Meroe in the country's Northern State, on January 9, 2025. (Photo by AFP)

The Red Cross raised alarm on Thursday at the growing use of drone attacks by warring parties on hospitals, electricity and water infrastructure in Sudan, which it said was contributing to widespread human rights violations.

Some 70-80% of hospitals in Sudan were not running and there were concerns cholera could surge due to damage caused by the war to water infrastructure, the International Committee of the Red Cross told reporters in Geneva.

"A recent drone attack stopped all the electricity provision in an area close to Khartoum, which means critical infrastructure is being damaged," said Patrick Youssef, the Red Cross's Regional Director for Africa, in a new report.

"There is a clear increased use of these technologies, drones - to be in the hands of everyone - which increases the impact on the local population and the intensity of attacks," Youssef said.

After two years of fighting between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, some people are returning to Khartoum after they were forced to flee when war broke out on April 15, 2023 amidst a ongoing power struggle between the army and the RSF ahead of a transition to civilian rule.

Some 12 million people have been displaced by the conflict since 2023.

"We have seen violations of the law left, right and center,” Youssef said, urging the warring parties to allow the Red Cross access so it can offer humanitarian support and document atrocities.

In March, aid groups told Reuters that the RSF had placed new constraints on aid deliveries to territories where it was seeking to cement its control. Aid groups have also accused the army of denying or hindering access to RSF-controlled areas.

Both sides in the conflict deny impeding aid.