What’s next for Hamas after Israel’s assassination of Yahya Sinwar?

As Gaza faces unprecedented destruction, experts and analysts have cast doubt on Hamas’ ability to maintain its traditional internal rules for selecting a new leader following Israel’s assassination of Yahya Sinwar.

The movement, which usually depends on elections and Shura Council processes from the grassroots to the top, is now likely to follow a different path through consensus and understanding among the different organizational levels to appoint a new head of political agency and other key positions.

This significant departure from established protocols comes amid extraordinary circumstances that make traditional electoral processes virtually impossible.

The Israeli military’s control of the Gaza Strip, coupled with the increasing risks facing Hamas leaders in host countries such as Lebanon, Iran, Qatar and others, has created an unprecedented challenge to the organization’s selection process.

The situation has been further complicated by Israel’s systematic attacks on Hamas’s leadership structure. Last Thursday’s announcement of Yahya Sinwar’s death was another major blow to the organization’s command structure.

Sinwar’s leadership had begun after the assassination of former chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31, while deputy Political Bureau chief Saleh Al-Arouri was assassinated on January 2. Israel had previously announced the assassination of Al-Qassam Brigade commander Mohammed Deif and several members of the military council, along with numerous brigade leaders across Gaza.

Esmat Mansour, a Palestinian ex-prisoner currently in Gaza who shared time with Sinwar in several Israeli prisons including Ashkelon, Hadarim and Beer Sheva, offered The new Arab unique insights into the character of the fallen leader.

“While his ideas about resistance and jihad were indeed extreme and rigid,” Mansour said TNA“Sinwar was not suicidal. He was rational and pragmatic and believed in long-term ceasefires and political settlements.”

According to Mansour, the scale of Israel’s response to Hamas’ attack on October 7 surprised Sinwar. “He never expected Israel’s completely destructive response,” Mansour explains.

“Nor did he expect that the (Hamas) military operation would succeed in breaking the borders between Gaza and Israel or bring about the sudden collapse of the Israeli security system. The chaos that followed, in which smaller armed groups and civilians participated, appeared to be beyond the scope of the original operation. planning.”

The current crisis represents what many consider Hamas’ most painful moment, but Professor Sami Al-Astal, an academic and researcher of Islamic movements, argues that rebuilding the organization is not impossible.

“Hamas has suffered significant blows in recent decades, including the assassination of its founder, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin in 2004, and the assassination of Gaza’s Hamas leader Abdul Aziz Rantisi just a month later,” he said.

The political landscape facing Hamas’s next leadership appears increasingly complex. Khalil Al-Hayya and Khaled Meshaal have emerged as potential candidates for the top political position, although Al-Astal suggests that any new leadership must take into account the dramatic changes in Gaza’s demographic landscape and Hamas’s political topography.

Significantly, he points out another possible option. “Forming a committee instead of appointing one person to lead the movement is a possibility under these compelling circumstances, especially if there are difficulties in smoothly and easily selecting a unanimously agreed upon individual,” he said.

“Hamas cannot fully adhere to its basic system and established regulations,” Al-Astal continued. “The radical changes in Gaza’s demographic composition and Hamas’s political landscape have affected the structure and leadership of the organization at the second and third levels and beyond, reflecting its current state of devastation and destruction.”

Political analyst Iyad Al-Qurra emphasizes Hamas’ resilience and institutional structure. “The movement has political offices, advisory councils and a military wing, each operating within an institutional framework,” he explains.

He points to Khalil Al-Hayya’s position as Sinwar’s deputy in the Gaza Political Bureau, noting his “personal and militant credentials, special relations with former Political Bureau chiefs Haniyeh and Sinwar, and a deep understanding of Hamas’s internal and external dynamics”.

However, the impact of the Israeli war extends beyond military casualties and creates what Al-Astal describes as “a rift between the organizational levels of Hamas and the Palestinian public in Gaza.” He notes that the people want to “stop death, restore life and hope, and rebuild their educational, health and economic infrastructure.”

This public sentiment, combined with broader regional dynamics, could force Hamas’s new leadership to reconsider its strategic approach. “Hamas recognizes the support of the strongest countries in the world for Israel and their abandonment of the Palestinians,” Al-Astal noted.

“The unmasking of the Iranian axis and its severe consequences due to assassinations of Hezbollah leaders and Iranian officials in the region force the movement to consider these developments when choosing its new leadership and policies.”

Despite devastating losses in Gaza during more than a year of war, with both the organizational and government apparatus affected by casualties and the destruction of facilities, Hamas retains some administrative capacity, albeit extremely limited.

The movement continues to sporadically pay some of the salaries of its government employees, contributes to aid distribution, and maintains some police presence through plainclothes officers.

Al-Qurra dismisses concerns about organizational instability following Sinwar’s death.

“The absence of one person has not and will not affect Hamas’ adjustment, decision-making, negotiation management and external relations,” he argues. He expects continuity in Hamas’ positions regarding the terms of prisoner exchanges, following the mechanisms previously established by Sinwar and agreed within Hamas.

“Al-Hayya is now leading the political file regarding the prisoner exchange negotiations,” Al-Qurra notes, “and the military system is operating in its own special way, having naturally adapted for a whole year to to meet the challenges. Sinwar’s absence will have no impact on the resistance.”

He emphasizes that “the negotiating file will not change, and that the file of Israeli prisoners and soldiers and the preservation of their lives does not depend on who will lead Hamas, as it will be managed differently.”

As Hamas moves through this critical transition period, the movement faces the challenge of balancing its ideological commitments with the practical needs of Gaza’s devastated people.

The selection of a new leadership could well be an indication of Hamas’s future direction; somewhere between maintaining its historic resistance stance and adopting a more pragmatic approach to ensuring the survival and reconstruction of Gaza.

This article was published in collaboration with Egab