Killing of Hamas leader: spiralling out of control?
The assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran has provoked harsh reactions and concerns about escalation. Iran has vowed to take revenge on Israel, which it blames for the deadly bombing. Russia, China and Turkey have also condemned the attack. Commentators analyse the events and potential consequences.
A pointless endeavour
Haniyeh's killing further discredits Israel internationally, says 24 Chasa:
“The war in Gaza and the tens of thousands of civilian casualties there have starkly changed Israel's image and, in particular, the country's moral standing in the world. While the Israelis are trying to destroy the physical infrastructure of Hamas and its leaders, the suffering of the Palestinians is discrediting Israel. In this race, Hamas seems to have succeeded in discrediting Israel faster than the Israelis would be able to destroy the organisation's entire military and political base.”
Irrational behaviour
El País sees Netanyahu putting his own personal interests above those of his country:
“There is little doubt that it is Netanyahu himself who is most interested in provoking a regional escalation. ... Israel is aware of its limitations when it comes to fighting on several fronts at once. ... None of its enemies has even the slightest chance of defeating the Israeli Defence Forces, but if they were to unite to form a common front, the situation would be extremely delicate for Israel. ... However, rationality is of little use in a region where all sides have been playing with fire for so long. ... And even less so if you factor in the personal objectives of Benjamin Netanyahu, who is trying to prolong the conflict against the interests of his own country in the vain hope of keeping his job as prime minister.”
Israel left in the lurch
The Daily Telegraph is stunned by the wave of international criticism:
“Rather than backing Israel in its hour of need, there are disturbing indications that both the Labour Government and the US Democratic Party are committed to reducing their support. In the UK, the Government has announced that it no longer intends to challenge the right of the International Criminal Court to seek an arrest warrant for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu ... With Kamala Harris, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, adopting a similarly critical tone, the Israelis could be forgiven for feeling betrayed by their so-called allies.”
Not the path to peace
The Irish examiner reflects on its own history:
“ [Haniyeh] was viewed as central to negotiations which might bring an end to the conflict. ... Israel cannot be a serious partner when it comes to peace if it is killing the very negotiators who are trying to create that peace. As we in Ireland know too well, the road to resolution is paved by getting people around the table but when all the boundaries of decency and humanity have been blown apart, the question that must be asked is - what possible ending can there be to this conflict?”
Israel dares to fight for freedom
The events of 7 October showed Israel that it could no longer accept the status quo, writes Echo24:
“For a long time, Israel believed that it could somehow manage the Iranian encirclement, that Hamas, Hezbollah and the Syrian regime were Tehran's puppets. This illusion was shattered by the massacre by Hamas hordes on 7 October. Israeli society could no longer ignore the dangers on its borders. There has been talk of a potential conflict in the north since the start of the Gaza war, and after Hamas it will also be necessary to put an end to Hezbollah. The attacks in Beirut and Tehran show that Israel is not afraid of a regional war. It has thrown down the gauntlet to Iran and its henchmen.”
Things could take a turn for the better
Frankfurter Rundschau warns against invoking escalation:
“Before the spiral of violence comes the spiral of thought. In the case of Haniyeh, it may be helpful to at least consider the possibility of things taking a turn for the better. Israel's more targeted approach could help to prevent the outbreak of a conflagration. Also with a view to relations between the peoples, it is important not to abandon hope. If a voice as inhumane as Haniyeh's has now been silenced, this may be beneficial not just for Israel, but also for the Palestinians in the medium term.”
A well-executed extremely challenging mission
Journalist Sergei Aslanyan marvels on Facebook at Israel's ability to carry out such a targeted attack in the middle of Iran:
“Tehran is located in the interior of the country. To reach it with a missile, you need either an aircraft flying around freely in Iranian airspace or a long-range missile, since Iran is surrounded on all sides by friendly states whose missiles are aimed in the opposite direction and not at Tehran. The third possibility would be an attack launched locally with a short-range missile. Or a grenade launcher. In any case, the elimination of the Hamas leader is the result of brilliant intelligence and excellent work.”
An act of international terrorism
Avvenire is outraged:
“If the attack on Hezbollah, in which Fuad Shukur, who is considered the movement's number two figure, was killed in Beirut, was a predictable reaction to the killing of twelve Druze children who were hit by a Shiite militia rocket, the assassination of the Hamas political leader Ismail Haniya in Tehran lacks all justification. His assassination in the capital of the Islamic Republic of Iran, where he was attending the inauguration of the new president, the moderate reformist Masoud Pezeshkian, is an act of international terrorism.”
New Iranian president in a tight corner
El País describes the assassination as a direct attack on Iran:
“It is an assault on the Iranian security apparatus, and the mighty revolutionary guard at the top. And the timing makes the pain doubly worse. ... The penetration of Iranian air defence is a humiliation for the regime. ... And now that Khomeini has vowed 'harsh punishment' for the 'Zionist regime', the risky operation has put the new [Iranian] president into a tight corner. His priorities (above all improving relations with the West) will be supplanted by the urgency of reprisals. ... All negotiations about restoring the nuclear deal are condemned to fail.”
Not much of a blow to the organisation
The death will have little impact on Hamas itself, Público predicts:
“Ismail Haniyeh is not Osama bin Laden, and the Hamas structure is used to dealing with the loss of its leaders, many of whom have been killed over the past 20 years. Hamas cannot be destroyed this way – and all the experts guarantee that it will not disappear. Haniyeh is even thought to have been one of the most pragmatic leaders, and one of the most willing to make a deal with Israel for the release of the 115 hostages (many of whom are already presumed dead).”
Massive retaliation doesn't work
Eldiario.es lambasts Israel's strategy:
“What Netanyahu is doing is a crazy race to nowhere. ... In attacking Iran, he has bitten off more than he can chew, and Shiite militias like Hezbollah or terrorist groups like Hamas are indestructible and will keep reproducing themselves as long as the situation in Palestine and the region is not pacified by political means. ... The system of massive retaliation that Israel has used since the founding of its state has never worked and will never work; the best it can do is temporarily satisfy the desire for revenge.”