October 17, 2024 - 6:30pm
Almost exactly a year after Hamas’s horrific attack on Israel, its leader Yahya Sinwar has been killed. This is not the end of Hamas, but it does offer Israel an opportunity to destabilise and fragment the group, similar to what Israel has done to Hezbollah — to cut the Islamists down to a more manageable size and bring the war to a conclusion on terms reasonably close to victory.
As I wrote in these pages a couple of months ago, it is not quite right to call Sinwar “the mastermind” of the 7 October attacks: he was among the lead architects, but Hamas is the Palestinian department of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and Iran was fully aware in advance of the plans for that day. Still, Sinwar has been the identifiable face of the enemy as Israel wages war to recover hundreds of hostages from Hamas and ensure there can be no future attacks of that magnitude on Israeli soil.
It was important for Israel’s security that Sinwar died. Beyond any of the tactical considerations about the conduct of Israel’s war in Gaza, the country needed to send a strategic message to the region that there is no profit in 7 October-type attacks on the Jewish State. On this score, Israel has succeeded. Hamas’s military leaders — Saleh al-Aruri, Marwan Issa, Mohammed Deif — have all been eliminated, and Hamas’s “political” chief Ismail Haniyeh was killed in an audacious MOSSAD operation in Tehran. Now, Sinwar is the latest to go.
His apparent successor, Rawhi Mushtaha, was confirmed dead two weeks ago, which increases the chances that Sinwar’s brother Mohammed will take over. The question is how long he lasts. Israel killed Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah at the end of September, and his relative Hashem Safieddine replaced him, only to (probably) be killed less than a week later.
These killings are not the same. The decapitation of Hezbollah was a targeted operation enabled by Israel’s infiltration of the group, but Sinwar’s downfall came about “by chance”.
There are similarities, however. Like Hezbollah, Hamas has lost most of its leadership cadre. The group will now have to cope with the same disarray in its command structure and loss of some of its “resistance” sheen. Sustained Israeli pressure on Hamas at this point could induce fractures, particularly with the group’s newer recruits and other non-core members, whose post-7 October morale is waning. Hamas might still exist in name, but its capacities could be diminished to a point where the threat it poses makes it strategically and politically possible for Israel to wind down the war.
Whether Israel is able to exploit this opportunity is unclear. It has so far removed the bulk of its troops from Gaza to deal with Hezbollah in the north, which might give Hamas enough breathing space to reconsolidate.
The easiest way for Hamas to save itself has always been to agree to give back the hostages. This would create an international political situation where it would be difficult for Israel to continue the war in the name of destroying the group. But Sinwar repeatedly blocked this course; his possible successors seem to be in the same mould. And no Israeli government, under any prime minister, will agree to end the war while the group still holds nearly 100 Israeli hostages.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeSomebody please can think about Corbyn and Owen Jones? They have only few friends left to cosplay with.
Interflora have extended Jeremy and Owen’s credit lines.
These wreaths don’t come cheap!
It would be nice to think that Mossad’s probably already preparing some ‘special’ wreaths, even as we speak.
So how does this all end? Israel’s plan appears to be to drive the Palestinians from Gaza and from the West Bank so that Israel extends “from the river to the sea”. Israel can, and should, do better than that.
For goodness sake… this ‘ends’ when those surrounding Israel stop attacking it.
Is that clear enough for you?
Indeed. It is very unnerving that some folks still don’t accept reality and continue to believe in the opposite of reality.
What then? What happens when the war ends? Do the Palestinians have their own state in Gaza and the West Bank? Does Israel withdraw from all its settlements in the West Bank? Does it let Gaza and the West Bank govern themselves? In other words, are there two states in the region or just one?
The problem is that Israel wants the entire region to be under its control but if it annexes the West Bank and Gaza then the Palestinians will be a majority. So Israel tries to have it both ways — control Palestine without annexing it. Or even to drive enough Palestinians out of the territories to be able to take them over.
It’s a tough problem, and Palestinian terrorism has made the problem much worse. The attacks last year on October 7 were inexcusable. But that doesn’t justify war crimes by Israel in return. Israel needs to be thinking of the future, instead of exacting revenge.
My guess would be that the Gazan Palestinians will be pushed in to Egypt and those in the West Bank ( an expression with only recent history and tending towards disuse ) will have to come to an arrangement with the Israelis.
Come on man! Are you serious?
If that were Israel’s goal it would happen within a week.
Yes, Israel could drive the Palestinians out within a week, but that would make Israel even more of a pariah. Dragging it out like they have gives revenge the patina of righteousness and a legitimate cover for terrorism to drive the Palestinians out. I’m not saying that’s Israel’s plan, but it certainly seems that way.
What other plan do they have for Gaza now that they have destroyed most of its infrastructure, driven its 2 million citizens from their homes, and killed its leaders? What other plan do they have for the West Bank, where settlers continue to encroach on Palestinian territory and Israel continues its harsh occupation of the rest?
Israel is using airstrikes and bombs and missiles of a modern army on a defenseless civilian population in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon. I do not question the right of Israel to exist, but I do question whether its goal is peace or conquest, and the methods it is using regardless of its goal.
Israel is fighting Hamas, and Hamas are hiding behind civilians. The Israelis have no choice but to inflict civilian casualties to liquidate their enemy. Were Hamas to declare defeat and take the consequences the killing of civilians would cease. This is War 101.
Since when did judging people by different standards become a virtue? You demand “better” of Israel but expect nothing of the Palestinians. How patronising.
That’s true. In my comments here I have not made clear my belief that the Palestinians deserve the strongest possible condemnation for their horrific terrorism and their refusal to let the Israelis live in peace.
The term “West Bank” is a modern designation that lacks historical precedent or validity. This region is historically known as Judea, a name deeply rooted in Jewish history and heritage. The name “West Bank” was coined by Jordan following its armed and hostile invasion of the area in 1948 until the end of its occupation in 1967. However, this land has been intrinsically linked to the Jewish people for millennia.
Judea is the land from which the Jews (i.e. Judeans) originate, a region where the Judean mountains form the backbone of the landscape. It is the territory historically allotted to the Tribe of Judah, one of the twelve tribes of Israel. The Judeans, or Jews, have lived in this area for many centuries, establishing a rich historical legacy. The cultural significance of Judea to the Jewish people cannot be overstated, making the term “West Bank” a misnomer that overlooks the profound connection between the land and its ancient inhabitants.
i see the BBC has updated their homepage with the story of Sinwar’s much deserved end with a black background to denote that they are in mourning.
I also notice that everywhere the BBC describes Sinwar as a “terrorist”, in inverted commas. Come on BBC, if Sinwar is not a terrorist, who is?! Sinwar is the very definition of a terrorist! The OED doesn’t need a writen definition, all it needs is a picture of Sinwar. Why can’t the BBC call him exactly what he is? Ask the BBC what a woman is, no answer; ask them what a terrorist is, no answer. If pushed, rather than fingering a real terrorist like Sinwar, they’d probably say a BNP member, or something like that. Terrible and gutless.
Weasels are like that.
Yasser Arafat was a terrorist, and they gave him the Nobel Peace Prize!
Menachem Begin was a terrorist and they gave him the Nobel Peace Prize too.
Begin was a democratically elected head of government of a recognised nation. Whatever you think of his actions in that role, that cannot be overlooked. Arafat was a straight-up terrorist, pure and simple. At the time, I remember thinking “Maybe they will give the Nobel Peace Prize to Carlos the Jackal next year”.
But before Begin was an elected politician he was an Irgun terrorist. He was proud of his involvement in the bombing of the King David hotel in Jerusalem in 1946, which killed 91 people.
Indeed, I posted about this before I noticed it had already been mentioned.
Bloody instructions, being taught, have a habit of returning to plague th’inventor.
It is astonishing that so many water carriers for Israel in Britain are unfamiliar with the actions of the Irgun, Lehi and Haganah aginst British soldiers and civilians relatively recently.
“if Sinwar is not a terrorist, who is?!”,
It is a good question and one worth thinking about.
The Israeli Army currently issues as an award, the Irgun and Stern Gang Ribbons, called the “Fighters for the Freedom of Israel Ribbon.”
These were the organisations that bombed the King David Hotel and murdered many British soldiers and civilians including Sergeants Clifford Martin and Mervyn Paice.
The two Sergeants were kidnapped, drugged and kept as hostages for almost a month before they were publicly hanged from trees outside Netanya in Palestine by the Irgun.
During the Deir Yassin massacre, early in the morning of April 9, Irgun and Lehi forces entereda small Arab village from different directions and methodically massacred Palestinian Arab villagers, including women and children, going from house to house as they emptied the village of its residents.
The leader of the Irgun was Manachem Begin, who went on to become Israels sixth Prime Minister.
He said of the operation:
“Tell the soldiers: you have made history in Israel with your attack and your conquest. Continue thus until victory. As in Deir Yassin, so everywhere, we will attack and smite the enemy. God, God, Thou has chosen us for conquest.
Was Manachem Begin a terrorist? Was the Irgun a terrorist organisation? If so why does Israel sill honour them?
The BBC is an awful organisation. Massively powerful thanks to its multi-billion dollar public funding (a tex in effect) – and unaccountable to anyone other than itself. It is an evil presence in our midst.
I wonder why no “Conservative” government ever privatized the BBC. Does it still need tax money to operate? Can it function on its own? The BBC today strikes me as one of those elite cocooned institutions not accountable to anyone.
Yes, on the 6am World Service News this morning, the frontman referred to Sinwar’s ‘assasination’. They’re a bl**dy disgrace.
It’s a simple equation for Hamas, as it has been ever since Oct 7. Keep the hostages and face fairly certain death; return the hostages and face a possible life. Whichever you choose, Israel, unlike the rest of the liberal democracies, will not stop.
What has been ignored is that under Khomeini meant, anything goes, if it furthers the cause of Allah. Hence October 7 was permissable.
The inability of the West to understand the theological outlook of Khomeini is our main weakness.
A theological outlook symbolized by the sword from its inception to the present and founded upon the notion of conversion, not by the power of compelling ideation, but by violence alone.
You are talking about Judaism, correct? Because the Hebrews didn’t waltz into Canaan on a path of rose petals strewn by the existing occupants. The Hebrews waged a war of conquest and slaughtered all of their opponents, down to the last man, woman, and child. All in the name of Yahweh. It is so recorded in the Holy Bible.
Actually most archeologists now think the Hebrews slowly migrated to Canaan, and over time interbred with the Canaanites. No parting of the Red Sea, no conquest.
Modern genetic analysis is saying the Jewish men interbred with local women rather than bring their own as they migrated around the world. Their mitochondrial DNA is more closely related to the local regions they live in, but their male Y-chromosomes go way back. This is rather amusing, because – culturally – they consider themselves matriarchal. Genetics says otherwise. (See, for example, “Before the Dawn,” last chapter – Nicholas Wade).
Duane.
Perhaps you should read the Bible, rather than just listen to leftists about what it says. Where the inhabitants of the Canaan welcomed the Hebrews of Egypt, there was peace and living well alongside one another. It was only those who intentionally attacked the weakest of the Hebrews, the Amaleks for example, who G-D sent the Hebrews to deliver his wrath.
Very much like today’s environment. Jordan, no particular problems, esp under King Hussien. Egypt, no particular problems since Anwar Sadat. Lebanon, before Arafat and then Hezbollah, no problems. It’s only since the Islamists and other terrorists (since Arafat was NOT an Islamist) that those countries and their arabs have suffered.
No, Duane, I’m not buying your attempt to be clever. Notwithstanding the (historically questionable) “conquering” of Canaan, Jews have never exhibited imperial aspirations, being instead satisfied with a tiny strip of dusty land from which they were repeatedly displaced. The intrinsically militant entity I described went on a sustained bloody spree of conquest that stretched from the Iberian peninsula and Morocco in the west to India and Pakistan in the east, slaughtering, enslaving, appropriating, and imposing intolerance everywhere that they went. To this day elements of that group strive to recreate that repressive and violent legacy. Suggesting that Jews have ever engaged in calculated genocide or imperialism of equivalent scale is absurd.
Your Biblical reference is uncorroborated by any ancient secondary source nor supported in the archeological record. Whatever happened between the Hebrews and Canaanites was not significant enough to merit mention in the historical records of the adjacent Hittites, Egyptians, Assyrians, Phoenicians, Babylonians, or Aegeans. Even if the Jews did wreak genocide on the Canaanites 3000 years ago, soon thereafter, as recorded in their Book of Isaiah, their ethos evolved into the aspiration that “they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.” No such ideal is expressed anywhere in the defining literature of the group I allude to, nor has their militant worldview evolved since their advent. Neither will one find a sentiment approaching the radical standard first enunciated by the Jew who founded Christianity: “I say to you, if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also”, an ideal of course never universally observed by his followers and yet profoundly influencing Western ideals to the present.
Well put, sir.
Hamas came, and may go. But the fundamental grievance of the Palestinians (their claim to the land) will continue.
UnHerd has removed three of my comments on this subject so if they return this comment will be redundant. But it does bother me that Israel seems to have no plan for after the fighting stops. What will they do with the people in Gaza? What will they do with the people in the West Bank?
Israel’s plan seems to be to destroy Gaza for at least a generation and to take over “Judea” and “Samaria” (the West Bank). A two-state solution appears to have no chance. Israel had the world on its side for once, but now it is alienating much of the world again. Why?
Alienating much of what world, Carlos? Most Western nations see this as a deliverance, that Israel is mopping up some of the Islamists in that region. Most Westerners see Islam as being the problem not Israel and the latter doing Western civilisations work for them is a godsend. There may be lip service condemnation by leaders but the average person sees Islam being defeated by frilly knickers and alcohol in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, or by force of arms in India, China and Myanmar.
Damned right! Arguably, lsrael in the process of saving the free world (mainly from themselves!).
Because they’re winning in what is, for them, a real existential fight.
It’s a mistake to think there are any “winners” from what’s going on.
Possibly excepting Netanyahu, who certainly is in an existential fight. And one being pursued oblivious to the costs to all in the region.
History decides the winners, Ghengis Khan, Stalin, the list goes on. It is a war not a debate.
Netanyahu has made it clear that he wants the war to continue after getting the hostages back, so no, the war will not end with “giving back the hostages” Hamas has been trying to offer a hostage deal since Oct8th 2032, but Netanyahu has refused. Israel has been attacking the Palestinians since the 1920s. It is time for them to stop.
Ideally, the Hamas-niks will turn on each other, now. What fun!