Dr. Ahmed Rafiq Awad: Choosing Sinwar reflects a bias towards his “hardline” approach and deprives Israel of any achievement it could boast about

Suleiman Basharat: Choosing Sinwar transfers Hamas’s decision to the Strip and frees it from Arab and regional political pressures

Abdul Majeed Suwailem: Choosing Sinwar reflects great appreciation for him and will not affect the movement’s political and negotiating strategy

Dr. Raed Nairat: Choosing Sinwar has strategic and tactical implications, most notably the re-integration of political and military work

Abdul Latif Ghaith: Al-Sinwar's selection was surprising to many and came in response to the current stage, which is considered a stage of conflict and fighting.

Dr. Munther Hawarat: A strong message to Israel that the creator of the “Al-Aqsa Flood” is the political leader and is running the battle in Gaza

Dr. Hussam Al-Dajani: A message that Hamas is strong, as despite the war, it is holding consultations between its institutions and electing a new leader.

Hamas surprised many locally, regionally and internationally when it chose Yahya Sinwar, the head of the movement in the Gaza Strip, as a successor to Ismail Haniyeh, the head of its political bureau, who was assassinated at dawn on Wednesday, July 31, by a missile or explosive device explosion while he was a guest in the Iranian capital, Tehran, which was quick to accuse Israel and hold it responsible and vowed a painful and deterrent response to its crime. What are the implications of this choice, firstly for Hamas, whose work is divided between two wings: a political wing that Haniyeh represented with distinction, and a military wing that Sinwar represented and continues to represent with distinction, to the extent that it was said that he was the architect of the "Al-Aqsa Flood" on October 7? And also for Israel itself, the primary suspect in the crime of assassinating Haniyeh, whom it used to describe as "moderate". Did it expect that his successor would be Yahya Sinwar, who personally leads the military battles from inside the tunnels or from a secret hideout above ground?

Writers and political analysts said, in separate interviews with Al-Quds.com, that choosing Sinwar as a successor to Ismail Haniyeh carries deep political implications that aim to send multiple messages on the local and international levels, most notably strengthening the movement’s position and highlighting its cohesion in the face of Israeli pressures and threats.

Gaza returns as Hamas' decision-making center

The writer and political analyst Dr. Ahmed Rafiq Awad believes that the selection of Yahya Sinwar as head of the political bureau of Hamas comes as a direct response to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, with the aim of stripping Israel of any achievement by assassinating Haniyeh that it can boast about. The selection of Sinwar means a message to Israel that if you kill a moderate man, the alternative is more extreme.

Awad said that choosing Sinwar confirms the return of Gaza as a decision-making center in the Hamas movement, noting that choosing Sinwar reflects a bias towards his approach, which is characterized by readiness and engagement, and the movement’s closeness to Iran.

Awad explained that this decision was not by election, but rather by choice, to cut off any internal controversy that might arise in the movement between all ideas, orientations and groups, so his choice settled much of the internal controversy.

Awad pointed out that the history of the Hamas movement has not witnessed divisions or cracks, and that its internal regulations are capable of overcoming any differences or controversy.

"Al-Aqsa Flood" is Hamas's strategic option

Awad pointed out that choosing Sinwar reflects Hamas's insistence on continuing the confrontation and engagement, and to prove that the "Al-Aqsa Flood" battle is the movement's strategic choice.

Regarding the impact of Sinwar's selection on the negotiations, Awad said that it means Sinwar is close to making the political and military decision, but Hamas's position is not the main obstacle, rather it is Israel that refuses to negotiate.

Awad pointed out that the selection of Sinwar came in response to Israel's intransigence, and to deal with the regional phase that Israel seeks to impose.

Awad believes that this decision to choose Sinwar will ease the pressure on Hamas leaders residing in Arab capitals, and on those countries as well.

Awad explained that Sinwar is a strong personality capable of managing all files and holding all the cards, which makes him the decision-maker and the final sayer in Gaza.

Several messages to Israel, the Palestinian community and the countries of the region

For his part, writer and political analyst Suleiman Basharat said that this choice was made in consultation with the inner circle within the movement’s institutions due to the impossibility of holding elections on a wider scale.

Basharat pointed out that several proposals were made to choose a new leader for Hamas to succeed Haniyeh, but it was unanimously agreed to choose Sinwar.

He pointed out that this choice carries multiple messages, including: a message to the Israeli occupation in which Hamas confirms, through the choice of Sinwar, that Israel's attempts to weaken or eliminate the movement during the past ten months have not succeeded, and that the movement is still strong in Gaza, and that its real strength still exists.

He added: "The other message is to the Palestinian community, especially the people of the Gaza Strip, as the new leadership of Sinwar, who is present in the Gaza Strip, strengthens the citizens' confidence in the Hamas movement, and sends a message that the leadership is present among them."

The political and military positions of Hamas are in harmony

According to Basharat, there is a message to regional and Arab countries, so that Hamas shows through this choice that it is free from any political pressures that may be exerted on it regarding its political bureau and leadership, as if it is confirming that its main decision is taken in the Gaza Strip.

He continued: There is another message related to the approach followed by Sinwar, whereby the choice appears to be in harmony between the political and military positions of Hamas, which reflects the trend towards merging the two sides.

Regarding the repercussions of choosing Sinwar, Basharat said that despite the importance of the choice, its impact on Hamas’s vision and political approach will not be significant, as the Hamas movement relies on its institutions and programs and not just on individuals. Also, choosing Sinwar strengthens the relationship with the axis of resistance and enhances the unity of the arenas.

Regarding the impact of choosing Sinwar on the course of negotiations regarding the negotiation deal, Basharat explained that the obstruction comes from the head of the Israeli occupation government, Benjamin Netanyahu, and that Sinwar was not absent from the negotiation process, as he had an influential opinion on it.

Basharat expected that the biggest challenge for Hamas would be Sinwar's ability to manage his political window and strengthen foreign relations, but this challenge could be overcome through the movement's institutions and members of its political bureau abroad.

Hamas is steadfast, cohesive and has effective institutions.

As for the writer and political analyst, Dr. Abdul Majeed Suwailem, he considered that the selection of Sinwar to assume the position of head of the political bureau of the Hamas movement carries a fundamental political dimension in addition to its symbolic dimension.

Suwailem stressed that this choice is a direct response to Israel and its supporters, through which Hamas sought to send a strong message that the movement is steadfast and cohesive and has effective institutions that continue to operate regularly.

Suwailem pointed out that Sinwar, despite being a symbol of steadfastness and cohesion, will not be able to carry out his duties directly, for reasons related to the nature of his work and his current circumstances.

"Instead, Sinwar's deputies and the movement's institutions will manage the day-to-day operations, while he will remain a symbol of facing challenges and adhering to constants," he added.

Enhance internal movement cohesion

On the other hand, Suwailem pointed out that the selection of Sinwar was driven by clear political goals, as this selection reflects a great appreciation for the personality that Sinwar enjoys on the popular, Arab and Islamic levels, and this selection of him comes as a kind of response by Hamas to the popular tide and the employment of that personality in the interest of the movement.

He stressed that Hamas does not face any problems regarding the selection of Sinwar to head its political bureau, but on the contrary, this selection strengthens the movement's internal cohesion.

Suwailem believes that this change in leadership and the selection of Sinwar will not affect the course of the negotiations, as Sinwar was previously participating in monitoring the course of the negotiations, and every step taken was done with his approval. Therefore, the movement’s strategy and the negotiations will remain as they are, with no significant negative effects from this appointment.

Israeli escalation will only lead to more extremism

In turn, writer and political analyst Dr. Raed Nairat said that choosing Yahya Sinwar to head the political bureau of Hamas carries important strategic and tactical implications.

He added: "Tactically, Hamas seeks, through the appointment of Sinwar, to send a strong message that the assassinations will not affect the movement, and that it will continue its institutional work."

According to Nairat, choosing a figure like Sinwar, who is viewed by the Israeli side as a hardliner, aims to emphasize that the Israeli escalation will only lead to more hardline action by Hamas, and bring the movement back to the field.

He continued: "From a strategic perspective, this choice represents a shift in Hamas's policy, which has maintained the separation of political and military action since 1994, noting that Hamas is returning politics to the field, i.e. merging political action with military action, especially in light of the absence of a horizon for a solution and ending the war.

Sinwar is an inspiring figure for the young generation.

Nairat believes that this choice of Sinwar restores Hamas' prestige among the Islamic and Arab popular circles, as Sinwar is considered an inspiring figure for the young generation.

He expressed his belief that Sinwar is capable of leading the Hamas movement with all its branches, especially at a stage in which military action dominates other activities.

Regarding the quick selection of a successor to the head of Hamas’s political bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, Na’irat explains that Hamas has a quick and effective mechanism for making decisions thanks to the presence of a Shura Council and leadership institutions ready to deal with changes. The movement also relies on an ongoing work program and does not focus on individuals alone.

Regarding the impact of choosing Sinwar on the course of negotiations regarding the deal, Nairat said that this choice will logically affect the negotiations, which have faltered due to an Israeli decision, noting that Hamas wants to send a message that it has presented Israel with its demands, and now it must move to the implementation phase.

Insistence on the approach of resistance and steadfastness

As for the Jerusalemite political analyst Abdul Latif Ghaith, he said: The selection of Sinwar was surprising to many observers, and came in response to the nature of the current stage, as it is a stage of conflict and fighting, and this reflects insistence on the approach of resistance and steadfastness in positions.

He added: "This choice came as a clear and decisive message to Israel and America, and it is also a special message to Netanyahu, who refuses to cease fire and withdraw from the Gaza Strip. It is as if Hamas is saying, 'In return for this stubbornness, we are offering the man of war, Sinwar, to be the address of the war.'"

Ghaith expressed his belief that this quick choice reflects the harmony and stability of the movement and resistance leadership, especially since the choice was unanimous.

No impact on the course of negotiations

Ghaith believes that the appointment of Sinwar carries a moral, symbolic and valuable message, because it is the choice of a living leader who is at the head of his combat work and in different circumstances.

He added: Choosing a military leader is in itself a response to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas.

Regarding the repercussions of choosing Sinwar on the negotiations, Ghaith said: Hamas said that whoever was leading the negotiations will continue to lead the process, indicating that this choice gives the Palestinian negotiator a solid and continuing position regarding a real ceasefire, withdrawal from all areas, and reconstruction.

Ghaith believes that the Palestinian side will not change its basic rules, and there will be no decline at all. On the contrary, there will be insistence and firmness in positions.

Settling internal disputes in Hamas

In turn, Jordanian writer and political analyst Dr. Munther Hawarat told "Al Quds": The selection of Sinwar is a victory for Gaza and a resolution of internal conflicts within the Hamas movement. The selection was like saying "He who bleeds is the one who makes the decisions."

He saw that choosing Sinwar is a strong message to Israel, which is that Hamas is continuing the resistance and will not give up its constants, and thus this gives Israel an indication that the Hamas movement is still continuing, adding: choosing Sinwar is evidence that the maker of the "Al-Aqsa Flood" is the political leader and is managing the battle in the Gaza Strip, and Israel will understand that.

He pointed out that the repercussions of choosing Sinwar on the negotiations indicate that hawks are more capable than doves of making decisions, and thus choosing Sinwar could lead to a firm decision on the negotiations level, in which concessions are absent. Israel may accept this, but it will most likely refuse.

He stressed that the problem is that Sinwar is in Gaza, and therefore the opportunity to use his political power on the regional and international levels becomes non-existent due to the Israeli pursuit of him, which may lead to a reduction in the extent of his political influence on all parties.

A message to Israel: You assassinated Haniyeh, and Sinwar came to you

Dr. Hussam Al-Dajani, Professor of Political Science at Al-Ummah University in Gaza, told "Al Quds": There are messages behind the assignment of Al-Sinwar, the most important of which is: Hamas is a strong institution. Despite the war and the bombing, it is holding consultations between its institutions and electing a leader for itself. The second message to Israel is that you assassinated Haniyeh, so Al-Sinwar came to you, and this name has no effect on the occupation.

Al-Dajani pointed out that the implications and repercussions of this choice, in my opinion, are an affirmation of the importance of the Al-Aqsa flood and the military option with the occupation, in light of the decline in settlement options due to the Israeli right-wing government.

He said: “Assigning Sinwar will have repercussions on the negotiations, and Netanyahu will have difficult choices, as he will be forced not to touch Sinwar and allow him to move around and appear if the deal reaches advanced stages, and Sinwar may make strong decisions without concessions. In my estimation, the important message that reached Israel is Haniyeh’s departure and Sinwar’s arrival.”

The necessity of improving relations with Egypt and the Gulf States

Regarding Sinwar's relations abroad, Al-Dajani said: Sinwar has strong relations with the axis of resistance, and this stage requires a person like Sinwar in light of the involvement of this axis in the fight against Israel.

Regarding Hamas’s relationship with the rest of the parties in the region, Al-Dajani added: “This is perhaps one of the most important challenges in the person of Sinwar and the identity of his deputy. I believe that Hamas must take into consideration its network of foreign relations in the region, and that there should be a new phase for it, and that Sinwar should have a strong network of relations with the Arab countries, especially the Gulf countries and Egypt in particular.”