BEIRUT — The recent assassination of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar by Israeli forces in Gaza has prompted the militant organization to contemplate a change in leadership for the second time in a matter of months.
The pivotal question is whether Hamas will shift away from its hardline stance or reinforce it, and how this decision could affect the future of the group as well as the potential revival of cease-fire and hostage exchange discussions with Israel.
Sinwar succeeded Ismail Haniyeh, who was killed in July in an explosion in Iran that many attributed to Israel.
As a significant player in the October 7, 2023, offensive against southern Israel, which escalated the conflict in Gaza, Sinwar’s selection was seemingly counterintuitive, especially when some anticipated a more moderate approach from Hamas aimed at de-escalating the situation.
Sinwar’s death occurred during what appeared to be a direct engagement with Israeli troops on Wednesday.
While Israel’s action represents a major symbolic triumph in its ongoing efforts against Hamas, it has also allowed the group to frame Sinwar as a battlefield martyr rather than hiding from confrontation.
Despite facing adversity and being pushed further underground in Gaza, Hamas persists in its resistance against Israeli forces and continues to maintain political influence.
Bassem Naim, a member of Hamas’ political bureau based in Qatar, compared Sinwar’s death to past losses of leaders such as Sheikh Ahmed Yassin and Abdel Aziz Rantisi, who were killed by Israeli airstrikes in 2004, asserting that such actions have only strengthened the group over time.
He remarked, “Each time, Hamas became stronger and more popular, and these leaders transformed into icons for future generations.”
The longer-term implications of Sinwar’s demise on Hamas’ military strategy in Gaza remain uncertain. However, Sadeq Abu Amer from the Palestinian Dialogue Group thinks that “there will be no significant impact on the political structure of Hamas.”
He noted that when Sinwar took charge, the organizational structure was adapted to enable Hamas to conduct its political operations independently due to challenges in communication with leaders outside Gaza.
Most operations were dealt with through a “collective leadership,” involving the heads of the Shura Council and regional officials managing both the West Bank and Gaza, with Sinwar notably handling all matters concerning Israeli hostages.
As for addressing Sinwar’s vacancy, his anticipated term was temporary and set to conclude in late 2025.
Thabet al-Amour, a political analyst in Gaza, indicated that Hamas would likely delay the selection of a new head for its political bureau, with Khalil al-Hayya, Sinwar’s deputy based in Qatar, already overseeing some executive responsibilities.
Abu Amer concurred that Hamas might choose to maintain its “collective leadership” approach, adding that they could opt for one of three prominent regional leaders: al-Hayya, Zaher Jibril (in charge of the West Bank), or Khaled Mashaal (responsible for areas outside Palestinian territories).
The leadership may also select a new head without public announcement for security considerations.
Should Hamas appoint a successor for Sinwar, Khaled Mashaal and Khalil al-Hayya are among the leading candidates for the position.
Al-Hayya has considerable experience, having served as Sinwar’s deputy and led the group’s delegation during cease-fire talks in both the current war and conflicts dating back to 2014. His past survival of an Israeli airstrike in 2007, which killed several family members, adds to his profile.
Although al-Hayya maintains connections to Iran, he is perceived as less extreme than Sinwar and was close to previous leader Haniyeh.
In a prior interview, al-Hayya expressed Hamas’s willingness to negotiate a truce lasting five years and indicated that the group would consider dissolving its military wing in favor of a purely political role if an independent Palestinian state was established along 1967 borders.
Mashaal, who led the organization from 1996 to 2017, is regarded as a more moderate figure, maintaining good relations with Qatar and Turkey, but experiencing tensions with Iran and Hezbollah due to his stance on the Syrian civil war.
Moussa Abu Marzouk, a founding member and former head of Hamas’ political bureau, is also viewed as a potential moderate candidate.
There have been speculations about Sinwar’s brother, Mohammed, potentially taking over; however, al-Amour believes that this possibility is unlikely.
“Though Mohammed Sinwar leads military operations, he won’t inherit his brother’s political role,” he stated, suggesting that Sinwar’s death may usher in a leadership direction perceived as more conciliatory.
The response concerning cease-fire discussions has already revealed divided approaches within Hamas. Al-Hayya, in one of the initial statements following Sinwar’s death, emphasized a strict stance on negotiations regarding the release of around 100 Israeli hostages believed to be held in Gaza, asserting that their release would only follow the cessation of Israeli operations.
Others predict that the group may soften its negotiating position, particularly as Mashaal is seen as more amenable to collaborating with intermediaries such as Qatar and Egypt to achieve a cease-fire, which could also stabilize tensions in Lebanon.
Nevertheless, Abu Amer noted that Sinwar’s assassination might complicate any future prisoner exchanges, as he was the only leader privy to crucial details regarding the hostages’ locations.