Image source, Getty Images
In today’s press roundup, we look at articles on the selection of Sinwar as head of Hamas’s political bureau, succeeding Ismail Haniyeh, as well as how Israeli newspapers view Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s performance in light of recent developments.
We begin our tour with the British weekly newspaper The Economist, which titled an article:Hamas’s choice of Yahya Sinwar as its leader makes a ceasefire less likely.”
The newspaper considered that the selection of Sinwar – who it described as the architect of the October 7 attack on the Gaza Strip towns – is “a clear message to the world that the hardline wing of Hamas is currently in charge, which makes it more difficult to reach an agreement between Israel and the movement that includes a halt to the war that has claimed the lives of about 40,000 people so far.”
The Economist suggested that “Sinwar’s appointment is technically temporary until the possible elections are held next year,” but it pointed out that the raging war in Gaza increases expectations that those elections will not be held on time, which may help Sinwar continue to head the movement’s political bureau without dispute.
The newspaper considered in its article that the movement’s inclinations towards external powers and the Hamas leadership’s preference for Yahya Sinwar over Khaled Meshaal – who was expected to return to the position of head of Hamas’s political bureau after Haniyeh’s death, as he had previously held this position and had experience in managing the political situation at the international level – were considered evidence that “recent years have witnessed a great deal of rapprochement between Sinwar and Iran,” which was a major reason for Sinwar’s preference over others, as the movement is in dire need of Tehran’s support in the current and future period during the war in the Strip, according to the report.
The newspaper believed that appointing Sinwar would further “marginalize the movement’s external political leaders, who are generally seen as more moderate and interested in diplomacy.”
The newspaper concluded that “if there was indeed a part of Hamas interested in diplomacy, this move weakened it. While Haniyeh was pushing for a ceasefire with Israel, Sinwar tried to prolong the conflict,” considering that with Sinwar consolidating his control over Gaza and Hamas’s political bureau, the chances of a ceasefire and the release of the hostages “seem more distant,” according to the article.
Hamas raises the bar
As for the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, it published an article by the writer Youssef Fares entitled: “Al-Sinwar as President: Hamas dispels the effects of Haniyeh’s assassination”.
The writer believes that by choosing Yahya Sinwar as head of the movement’s political bureau, Hamas “raised the challenge to Israel to a higher level after the Netanyahu government believed that overthrowing Ismail Haniyeh would lead to a restructuring of the movement’s leadership and give it greater flexibility in its positions.”
The writer considered that Hamas “wanted to send several messages to Israel that would dispel the Israeli understanding of the nature of the movement’s leadership, which was the motive for the assassination of Haniyeh,” especially since Sinwar was chosen unanimously without the need for elections, and the alternatives that Israel considered less extreme, such as Khaled Meshaal and Moussa Abu Marzouk, united and “agreed on Sinwar and what he represents in terms of the movement’s current direction.”
The writer says that the position of head of Hamas’s political bureau, on the domestic level, is equivalent to the position of Israeli prime minister, which makes the selection of Sinwar “a message to Israel that whoever holds the reins within the movement is someone from the alleys of Gaza,” and he may be able, through his decisions, to get rid of the influence of the “capitals that support” Hamas in the region, as he put it.
The writer adds that on the regional level, “the selection of Sinwar – which coincides with Hamas’s occupation of the heart of the Palestinian resistance – is a clear message that the Qassam Brigades can fight for the next four years,” which is the term of the new head of the political bureau, and “it is one of the clearest messages that the movement is sending to all concerned parties,” according to the writer.
The writer concludes by saying that Hamas “undermines the strategic implications of the assassination, in addition to the impact of Sinwar’s new position,” and he considered that his election “was a major moral shock,” after Israel’s number one enemy assumed the highest position in the movement after ten months of war in which Israel thought it “was able to shatter the man’s moral image, not only in the Gazan street, but also within the movement’s party bases.”
Netanyahu and the catastrophe
Image source, AFP
And to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, which titled its editorial today: “Netanyahu is leading Israel to another disaster”.
The newspaper says that Israel has been “on the brink of a regional war against Iran and its allies since the October 7 attack,” and fears have increased inside Israel in recent days due to Iranian threats to “respond harshly” to the killing of Fouad Shukr in Beirut and Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran.
The newspaper believes that “while the Israeli army cannot keep up with the Iranian fire belt alone,” it is trying to “rely on the US-led coalition, which has begun to mobilize its military forces in the region despite the Biden administration’s harsh criticism of Netanyahu’s policies.”
The newspaper held the Israeli Prime Minister responsible for the current potential escalation and the threats the country faced on the regional level, noting that after about ten months of war in Gaza, “Netanyahu was unable to achieve the complete victory he promised,” and instead, “the failure of the Israeli government may drag the country into a war against Iran,” according to the newspaper.
The newspaper believes that “the showy actions carried out by Netanyahu with the help of his security services – the assassination of Hezbollah leader Fouad Shukr and Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh – raised morale in Israel, but at the same time these operations confirmed to Netanyahu that such measures would not be able to weaken the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.”
The newspaper recalls that the Israeli Prime Minister had previously approved military operations on Iranian territory, including the assassination of Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrzadeh and the attack on drone commanders in Kir Manshah, but “Iran exercised restraint in these measures and began exploiting Israel’s crisis, which is represented by its involvement in the war in Gaza and the tensions between it and Hezbollah in the north.”
The newspaper concluded its editorial by saying that the only solution for “Israel to emerge from the catastrophe that Netanyahu has brought the country into” is for the prime minister to “start using his mind, listen to the Biden administration, and take diplomatic paths while seeking a ceasefire in Gaza instead of continuing the conflict – which could spiral out of control and expand – in order to remain in power.”