Yahya Sinwar’s militarism has little to offer Palestinians

Yahya Sinwar holds the child of a Hamas fighter, who was killed in fighting with Israel, during Gaza City rally in 2021. Mr Sinwar is on the run from Israeli forces, calling into question the practicaShow more

The news that Yahya Sinwar – widely regarded as a principal architect of the October 7 attacks on Israel – has been chosen as the new head of Hamas will be disappointing for those who are desperate to see an end to the assault on Gaza and the accompanying suffering of the Palestinian people.

Mr Sinwar’s background as an enforcer within the Hamas ranks and his reputation as an ideologue committed to military victory over Israel suggest that negotiation efforts under his supervision will not be any more fruitful than they have been so far. In addition, the fact he is in hiding, on the run from Israeli forces, calls into question the practicalities of communicating effectively with such a clandestine figure.

However, if the rise of an unwavering militarist like Mr Sinwar presents an unpalatable negotiating prospect for Israel’s leadership, they have only themselves to blame. Although the country has not admitted responsibility for last week’s assassination in Tehran of his predecessor, Ismail Haniyeh, the result is that a man said to be instrumental in the deaths and kidnappings of more than 1,200 Israelis – reportedly against the wishes of Hamas’s leadership in exile – is now someone who, according to the US-based Soufan Centre think tank, “is in a position to accept or reject any ceasefire and hostage release agreement with Israel”.

This assumes that both protagonists in this disastrous conflict actually want a way out. In reality, both remain committed to visions of their own total victory that are illusory. Hamas’s starting position that Israel withdraws from Gaza, leaving it in charge of the enclave’s security is a demand that, if met, would leave the territory in the same position it was in on October 6, except with tens of thousands of civilians dead, a shattered economy and ruined infrastructure.

For Israel, still committed to an unachievable goal of destroying Hamas, Mr Sinwar’s elevation offers an opportunity to shore up wavering support among its international allies. Many countries have expressed their horror at Israel’s actions in Gaza and the occupied West Bank, leading to international legal cases, more governments recognising Palestinian statehood and the passing of UN resolutions. However, Israel can now present Mr Sinwar as a bogeyman figure, using his militancy as an excuse to press on with its own quixotic war aims.

Mr Sinwar – a shadowy, unaccountable militant who gambled recklessly with Palestinian lives and is now in a fight until the bitter end – is not the leadership that Palestinians need. Neither is the questionable approach of the Palestinian Authority, which continues to embody ineffective leadership both through its own failings and from being undermined by Israel. Many capable and pragmatic Palestinian figures who could deliver a compromise have been sidelined or languish in Israeli custody.

It would be unwise to speculate on the effect Mr Sinwar’s leadership will have on the future of on-off talks involving the US, Egypt and Qatar. How current reconciliation efforts between Hamas and its main Palestinian rival, Fatah, will fare under Mr Sinwar’s stewardship remains to be seen.

What is clear however, is that different and better answers are needed to end the deadly embrace shared by Hamas and Israel’s leadership. Such answers are not to be found in an extreme-right Israeli Cabinet, nor in the tunnels of Gaza.