On the Brink: Three Important Takeaways from Haniyeh's Assassination

The assassination of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, and hours before that the assassination of Fouad Shukr, a senior Hezbollah leader, in an Israeli raid on the southern suburbs of Beirut, reveal three important conclusions, all of which lead to strengthening the belief that the October 7 war is still far from ending soon, or even settling into a low-risk pace in terms of its regional dimension.

First conclusion: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has become more emboldened to escalate the war after his visit to the United States, and President Joe Biden’s administration has become weaker in its influence over him to avoid escalation, or more submissive to his game aimed at prolonging this war for as long as possible, and inflaming its regional risks. In both cases, the current American moment, preoccupied with the presidential elections, appears as an opportunity for Netanyahu to try to reverse the course of the war.

Conclusion 2: Israel’s involvement in the new diplomatic efforts to reach a deal with Hamas to cease fire in Gaza, and its acceptance of President Joe Biden’s proposal, were just another game of Netanyahu’s in this war to deceive the world. The fact that Haniyeh was a driving force behind a prisoner and hostage exchange deal to end the war suggests that one of the main goals of his assassination was to undermine the possible chances of reaching such a deal in the foreseeable future.

There is a clear reason why Netanyahu is evading the deal at the present time, which is that his more extreme partners in the government do not want this war to end without Israel achieving a clear victory. But this is not the only reason. Netanyahu is betting on the return of former US President Donald Trump to the White House next November. He believes that such a return will give America a free hand to Israel to accomplish what it failed to achieve in the war with the Biden administration.

The third conclusion is that Israel’s brinkmanship in its confrontation with Iran and its allies in the region could push it into a comprehensive regional war, regardless of the declared desire of Israel, Iran and the United States to avoid it, and that the rules of deterrence and engagement that managed the regional course of the October 7 war and have prevented it from spiraling out of control until today are no longer in place after the assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran and the Israeli strike on the southern suburbs of Beirut. The expected Iranian response to the two assassinations, whether directly or through its allies or both, will be decisive in determining the course of the war from now on.

But the difficult test facing Tehran and its allies is a strong response to the assassinations that balances between restoring the rules of deterrence and engagement with Israel, and does not lead to a slide into a regional war. The assassination of Haniyeh in Tehran is a major blow to Iran, not only in terms of the dangerous internal security exposure, but also in terms of the cracking of the new concept of deterrence that it has sought to establish in its conflict with Israel since the direct Iranian missile attack on it last April.

The assassination of Haniyeh and senior Hezbollah commander Fuad Shukr may help Netanyahu market himself domestically to reunite Israelis behind him in this war, and to show that his management of it is achieving strong results, and externally to send a strong message of deterrence to Iran and its allies in the region, but it will not get Israel out of the strategic impasse it faces in the October 7 war.

Israel is still unable to achieve its war goals in the Gaza Strip, to recover its captives by force, and to eliminate Hamas leader in Gaza Yahya Sinwar.

It is inconceivable that the assassination of Haniyeh will in any way lead to the destabilization of the leadership of the Hamas movement. Moreover, the violent internal polarization in Israel regarding Netanyahu’s management of the war will not end with the assassination of Hamas leaders and a show of force with Iran and its allies.

Moreover, Hezbollah will continue to pose another strategic dilemma for Israel in restoring security on its northern front. Even as Iran and Hezbollah show extreme caution in avoiding a slide into a broader confrontation, the regional support fronts for the Palestinian resistance will continue to act as a major pressure on Israeli and American war policy.

The future of the Middle East has become more than ever hostage to Netanyahu’s adventures, which derive their power not only from Israeli arrogance but also from being fueled by the United States and the West, and by the high-risk path the Israeli-Iranian conflict is taking after the assassination of Haniyeh and Shukr.

The high costs, which once served as a powerful deterrent to a regional war, no longer mean that such a war cannot happen, nor that it is inevitable. However, the assassinations may be just the beginning of the most dangerous scenario in the October 7 war.

The American factor remains a decisive factor in preventing the escalation of regional unrest. The back-channel diplomacy that Washington has pursued with Tehran in recent months to manage the action and reaction between Israel and Iran will be tested once again as to whether it is still effective in reducing the risks.

The future of the Middle East has become more than ever hostage to Netanyahu’s adventurism, which draws its strength not only from Israeli hubris but also from being fueled by the United States and the West.