Hamas to Conceal Identity of Sinwar’s Successor, Five Candidates Considered

Hamas is set to keep the identity of its new political bureau chief secret after Israel assassinated Yehya Sinwar, the group’s Gaza leader, on Wednesday.

This follows the killing of former political chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran less than three months ago.

Sources told Asharq Al-Awsat that Hamas leaders are discussing the decision to hide the new leader’s name due to growing security risks.

“The leadership is likely to keep the identity confidential for safety reasons,” one source said.

The move is aimed at giving the new chief more freedom to operate and avoiding Israeli assassination attempts, which have targeted many of Hamas’ leaders.

The secrecy is also expected to help maintain internal order and protect the group’s structure.

Hamas wants to keep Israel uncertain about who will make decisions if talks resume on a ceasefire and a prisoner exchange in Gaza.

Since Friday, after officially announcing Sinwar’s death, Hamas leaders have been discussing who will replace him and whether to reveal their identity.

Sinwar was appointed about three months ago to send a defiant message to Israel and to show Hamas’ commitment to its “Al-Aqsa Flood” campaign.

His selection also aimed to reduce pressure on the group’s external leadership, which faces Israeli threats, political pressure from mediators, and calls for host countries to expel Hamas leaders.

Potential Successors:

Darwish, the ‘Shadow Man’

Several candidates are being considered to replace Sinwar, who faced no competition for Hamas’ political leadership after Haniyeh’s assassination in Tehran on July 31.

The focus is now on Mohammad Darwish (Abu Omar Hassan), head of Hamas’ Shura Council. He was relatively unknown until gaining attention after Haniyeh’s death.

Many believe he has a strong chance, having appeared in recent official meetings ahead of some long-standing leaders.

A Hamas source said Darwish, once seen as the “shadow man,” is now taking on a more prominent role, receiving visitors and leading key activities.

Darwish spent much of his life abroad and was closely tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, from which Hamas originally emerged. Hamas later revised its charter and distanced itself from the Brotherhood.

Khalil al-Hayya: Sinwar’s Deputy

Alongside Darwish, Khalil al-Hayya is seen as a key contender, believed to be Sinwar’s deputy. Al-Hayya became a leading figure in Gaza after Sinwar’s disappearance and assassination.

A veteran political leader in Gaza, al-Hayya became Sinwar’s deputy and a close ally. He now leads Hamas in Gaza and is in charge of ceasefire negotiations and a potential prisoner exchange.

Al-Hayya has represented the group on key occasions, including speeches marking the October 7 attack and mourning Sinwar, calling him “the leader of the Al-Aqsa Flood battle.”

He promised that Hamas would continue its fight for full Palestinian liberation and a state with Jerusalem as its capital.

Al-Hayya also stated that Israeli prisoners held by Hamas would not be released unless Israel halts its offensive on Gaza, withdraws, and frees Palestinian prisoners.

Known as a political hardliner, al-Hayya, like Sinwar, supports strong ties with Iran.

Khaled Meshaal: Closer to the Muslim Brotherhood than Iran

In addition to al-Hayya and Darwish, Khaled Meshaal, Mousa Abu Marzouk, and Mohammad Nazzal are also possible candidates to lead Hamas.

Meshaal led Hamas’ political bureau for about 21 years and now heads the group’s external branch.

After Haniyeh’s assassination, Meshaal reportedly declined the leadership role due to health reasons and the current situation. It is unclear if he will now step in after Sinwar's death.

Meshaal is widely known politically and is seen as more connected to the Muslim Brotherhood than to Iran.

Mohammad Nazzal: A Hardliner in Hamas

Mohammad Nazzal’s influence was evident in the recent elections.

Born and raised in Amman, Jordan, Nazzal is originally from the West Bank and studied in Kuwait. He joined Hamas at its founding and has been a member of the political bureau since 1996. Nazzal is regarded as one of the hardliners within the group.

Mousa Abu Marzouk: First Head of the Political Bureau

Mousa Abu Marzouk is another candidate for leadership. He co-founded Hamas in 1987 and was its first head of the political bureau.

He currently serves as the deputy head of Hamas’ external branch. Born in 1951 in the Rafah refugee camp, his family was displaced from a village near Ramla.

It is expected that the next Hamas leader will be chosen from among these candidates rather than from Gaza, especially given the communication breakdown with some leaders in the territory.

Hamas has a system for selecting successors for vacant positions.

Hiding the Identity of Hamas' Leader

Hamas began concealing the identity of its leader in 2004 after Israel assassinated founder Ahmed Yassin on March 22, followed by his successor, Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, on April 17.

For a long time, Hamas did not disclose the name of its leader in Palestine to avoid Israeli targeting.

Sinwar was killed on October 17, a major setback for Hamas that came just three months after former political chief Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in Tehran.

Sinwar’s death has prompted Hamas to start extensive consultations to shape its future approach to the ongoing conflict and ceasefire negotiations.

This shift returned decision-making power to the external leadership after Gaza had been the focus.

Future decisions are likely to involve broader discussions, especially with the absence of influential historical leaders. While not indicating a collective leadership model like Hezbollah's in Lebanon, it suggests a move towards more inclusive consultation.

Since its founding in 1987, Hamas has had four leaders of the political bureau: Abu Marzouk (1992-1996), Meshaal (1996-2017), Haniyeh (2017 until his assassination), and Sinwar. A fifth leader is expected to be chosen soon.

The United States will keep backing Syria’s government and has no “Plan B” to working with it to unite the war‑scarred country back together, still reeling from years of civil war and wracked by new sectarian violence, US envoy Tom Barrack said on Monday.

In an interview with the Associated Press, Barrack – Washington’s ambassador to Türkiye and special envoy for Syria, who is also on a short assignment in Lebanon – called last week’s Israeli strikes inside Syria “badly timed” and said they had “complicated efforts to stabilize the region.”

Barrack spoke in Beirut after more than a week of clashes in Sweida province between Druze militiamen and Sunni Bedouin tribes.

Over the weekend he brokered what he described as a limited ceasefire between Syria and Israel, aimed only at halting the fighting in Sweida. Syrian government troops have since redeployed in the area and evacuated civilians from both communities on Monday, he said.

Barrack told the AP that “the killing, the revenge, the massacres on both sides” are “intolerable,” but that “the current government of Syria, in my opinion, has conducted themselves as best they can as a nascent government with very few resources to address the multiplicity of issues that arise in trying to bring a diverse society together.”

Regarding Israel’s strikes on Syria, Barrack said: “The United States was not asked, nor did they participate in that decision, nor was it the United States’ responsibility in matters that Israel feels is for its own self-defense.”

However, he said Israel’s intervention “creates another very confusing chapter” and “came at a very bad time.”

Prior to the violence in Sweida, Israel and Syria had been in talks over security matters, while the Trump administration had been pushing them to move toward full normalization of diplomatic relations.

When the latest fighting erupted, “Israel’s view was that south of Damascus was this questionable zone, so that whatever happened militarily in that zone needed to be agreed upon and discussed with them,” Barrack said. “The new government (in Syria) coming in was not exactly of that belief.”

The ceasefire announced Saturday between Syria and Israel is a limited agreement addressing only the conflict in Sweida, he said. It does not address broader issues including Israel’s contention that the area south of Damascus should be a demilitarized zone.

In the discussions leading up to the ceasefire, Barrack said “both sides did the best they can” to reach agreement on specific questions related to the movement of Syrian forces and equipment from Damascus to Sweida.

He suggested that Israel would prefer to see Syria fragmented and divided rather than a strong central state in control of the country.

Later Monday, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz posted on X that Israel’s strikes “were the only way to stop the massacre of the Druze in Syria, the brothers of our brothers the Israeli Druze”.

Katz added: “Anyone who criticizes the attacks is unaware of the facts,” he continued. It was not clear if he was responding to Barrack’s comments.

Damascus has been negotiating with the Kurdish forces that control much of northeast Syria to implement an agreement that would merge the US-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces with the new national army.

Hamas to Conceal Identity of Sinwar’s Successor, Five Candidates Considered