The method, location, and timing of the assassination of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh are the story and the message. It is a major turning point. Whether Iran retaliates directly or through its militias, Netanyahu has changed the course of events to his advantage.
Dear reader, consider this quote to understand what I mean. "The United States is a superpower. Yet, for nine months, it has been unable to broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Now, with the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh on Wednesday, the blood feud between the two appeared to deepen, with American peacemakers standing on the sidelines."
It was not a Palestinian party that said this, nor is it my opinion. It is part of the introduction to a Washington Post article by David Ignatius. It affirms the points I made in last week’s column: "Now, Keep Your Eyes on Netanyahu."
In it, I argued that, after his recent visit to Washington and Biden's decision to withdraw from the presidential race, Netanyahu is no longer constrained. He does not listen to anyone, not even the American administration, and will do what he likes until the American people head to the polls on November 5.
Netanyahu realized that the balance of power in Washington had shifted following Biden's withdrawal. He now has several objectives, including the fortification of his leadership domestically and drawing - or rather imposing - a new landscape for the next American president. If Kamala Harris becomes president, she will have to deal with the reality he has created on the ground.
If Trump is elected president, he will follow the plan that Netanyahu had laid out for him. It is clear that Netanyahu has learned a lot from Trump’s way of thinking, particularly his decision to assassinate Qassem Soleimani. Netanyahu has now followed in Trump’s footsteps, targeting figures who had believed to be off-limits, such as Haniyeh, and he did it on Iranian soil.
Now, Iran might retaliate, or an Iranian proxy militia in the region could do so. However, this does not concern Netanyahu in the slightest, as such a response would be perfectly suited to his objectives. The most prominent of these objectives is escalation. Indeed, Netanyahu’s strategy is clearly to strike at the "tentacles of the octopus," as the Israelis used to say.
Iran could either maintain its "strategic patience," launch a symbolic response or drag Washington into military confrontation. More than it had ever been before, this is now Netanyahu’s main goal. That is why he risked exposing intelligence capabilities that Israel had not previously dared to reveal, especially in the operation to assassinate Haniyeh in Tehran.
Now the question is: What about Hamas? I believe that Mr. Abdulrahman Al-Rashed summed up the answer to this question nicely in his column "Haniyeh is Sinwar’s victim." In it, Rashed reminds us of a fact that is often overlooked in the media: Sinwar and Haniyeh were competitors and rivals. However, the heart of the matter is in the following quote from the article.
"Netanyahu and Sinwar destroyed the future of Hamas, and the movement, along with Gaza, became a victim of extremist calculations, joined by Tehran, which decided late last year to try to change the rules of the Palestinian game and prevent regional reconciliation efforts."
That is absolutely right. This is precisely what Netanyahu wants, at least until November 5. Therefore, things will be entirely different following the assassination.
