Listen to article:
Haniyeh lived in Qatar… Israel’s choice to specifically kill him in Iran had several results: ended efforts to improve U.S.- Iran relations, closed the window for addressing Iran’s nuclear program, impeded chances of a ceasefire in Israel’s war on Gaza, and escalated danger of a wider regional war – that would involve Americans in another disastrous conflict…
by Alison Weir
Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas’ political wing, was assassinated on Wednesday in Tehran, where Haniyeh was present for the inauguration of the new Iranian president, Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian.
Pezeshkian is known as a moderate who has sought dialogue with the U.S., repeatedly stating that he would pursue negotiations with the United States – a position that seemed to be supported by Iran’s Supreme Leader.
The New Statesman reports: “Haniyeh has been pushing for months to reach a ceasefire agreement – often clashing with Yahya Sinwar, the head of Hamas’s military wing, who opposes a ceasefire deal – and US officials had indicated in recent days that a deal was near.”
While Israel virtually never admits its assassinations, no one doubts that it perpetrated the murder – especially since Israel had earlier pledged that it would kill Haniyeh.
In addition, this is just the latest action in Israel’s decades-long campaign against Iran.
The assassination came hours after another Israeli attempted assassination in Lebanon killed three civilians.
In an interview on NPR, Iran expert Trita Parsi, Executive Vice President of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, discussed the dangerous and likely intentional ramifications of Israel’s provocative action:
Steve Inskeep: Ismail Haniyeh was killed while attending the inauguration of an Iranian president who wanted to reengage with the United States. What does that mean for this part of the story?
Parsi: Well, it likely means that whatever window of opportunity, the election of Pezeshkian provided for both the United States and Iran to reengage diplomatically.
And as you may know, the Iranian nuclear program has progressed in a way that is very dangerous and necessitates some sort of a diplomatic round of talks to be able to push it back again. But that window has probably to a large extent, at least in the short and the medium term been closed.
And it is noteworthy, of course, that the Israelis knew exactly where Haniyeh was when– mindful of the fact that he lives in Qatar and could have probably done it in Qatar at any moment. They chose specifically to do it while he was in Tehran in order to send a couple of signals.
One is potentially the desire to shut down the window of any diplomatic engagement between the U.S. and Iran, but also send a signal that the different groups that Iran is supporting, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Iraqi militias and Hamas, that they are not safe anywhere, including in Tehran, and that Tehran cannot protect them.
Inskeep: I should note one thing you say the Israelis did this. I know you’re presuming that we do not have confirmation from Israel that it was involved. And our editor, James Hider doubts that Israel would own up publicly to to such an act. But this is the accusation that is that is being made. What is the significance of it for Israel, of what would seem to be a more intense confrontation with Iran? Israel has owned up, of course, to killing Hezbollah leader that is a leader of another Iran linked group.
Parsi: If it is Israel that was behind this, then within the span of 12 hours, they have targeted both Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran at the same time. It’s very difficult to see that as something that is not designed to escalate the situation further.
We know that from the exchange of fire between Iran and Israel back in April, the Israelis wanted to go much further, but it was the Biden administration that restrained Israel and made sure that it absorbed the blows that Iran gave it in retaliation.
The Iranians are likely going to retaliate against this. This is deeply embarrassing for them and it’s going to be very difficult for a lame duck Biden administration to be able to keep a lid on this compared to what they managed to do in April.
At the same time, I think we have to recognize, though, that if the Biden administration had pushed and forced a cease fire much, much earlier, much of this would have been avoided.
Inskeep: Let’s talk about the cease fire because our correspondent, Daniel Estrin, tells us that Haniyeh, the man who was killed, was essential figure in negotiating or efforts to negotiate a cease fire in Gaza. Is that effort now dead?
Parsi: It seems to, at least in the short and medium term, not only dead, but to be deliberately killed.
Netanyahu has systematically undermined these negotiations. Israeli media has even reported how he has selectively released intelligence in order to sabotage the talks.
But nothing will that sabotage the talks more than killing the guy on the other side of the negotiating table.
Other experts have also discussed Israel’s provocative actions against Iran.
There have long been indications that Israel is working to get the U.S. to attack Iran on its behalf as it succeeded with Iraq.
On April 3, Colonel Douglas Macgregor and Judge Andrew Napolitano laid out the tactics of the Israeli government to embroil the US into its regional war: Israel’s lethal attack on Iran’s embassy complex in Syria was intended to provoke a retaliation from Iran.
Colonel Douglas Macgregor is a retired combat veteran who served as a Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Defense under President Trump.
On July 24th, Col. Macgregor pointed out the devastating consequences a U.S. war with Iran would have for Americans:
RELATED:
On July 31st, Ambassador Chas Freeman (bio below) said of the assassination: “I believe It represents an effort by prime minister Netanyahu which he began nine months ago to entangle the United States in Israel’s wars with the Palestinians and its neighbors.”
“This is an indication that Israel, basically, is prepared to commit any crime at all. It feels no constraints.”
Ambassador Chas W. Freeman, Jr. is a career diplomat (retired) who was Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs from 1993-94, earning the highest public service awards of the Department of Defense for his roles in designing a NATO-centered post-Cold War European security system and in reestablishing defense and military relations with China. He served as U. S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia (during operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm). He was Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs during the historic U.S. mediation of Namibian independence from South Africa and Cuban troop withdrawal from Angola.
Ambassador Freeman worked as Deputy Chief of Mission and Chargé d’Affaires in the American embassies at both Bangkok (1984-1986) and Beijing (1981-1984). He was Director for Chinese Affairs at the U.S. Department of State from 1979-1981. He was the principal American interpreter during the late President Nixon’s path-breaking visit to China in 1972. In addition to his Middle Eastern, African, East Asian and European diplomatic experience, he had a tour of duty in India.
