The West’s criticism of Haniyeh’s assassination misses the anti-terror point - editorial

The assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran has provoked a wave of international condemnation, with numerous world leaders and organizations decrying the act as a dangerous escalation.

However, their reaction fails to acknowledge the significance of this action in the broader context of global security and the ongoing war on terror. Instead of criticizing Israel, the Western world should commend this decisive move, which reinforces the commitment to combating terrorism.

Haniyeh, for more than seven years the prominent leader of Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization, had a long history of orchestrating violence and terror against civilians.

Under his leadership, Hamas has carried out numerous attacks that have resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent people. His regime in Gaza was marked by aggressive militarization, the launching of rockets into Israeli territory, and the brutal suppression of political opponents within the Palestinian territories. Haniyeh’s alliance with Iran further exacerbated regional tensions, providing Hamas with the resources and support needed to sustain its terrorist activities.

Designated as a terrorist by multiple countries – including the US, Israel, Canada, and the European Union – Haniyeh’s record speaks for itself. His involvement in numerous acts of terrorism, including suicide bombings, rocket attacks, and the orchestration of violent uprisings, has left a trail of destruction and grief. The US State Department specifically noted his role in destabilizing the region and contributing to a climate of fear and violence.

The leader of a terrorist group 

Under Haniyeh’s leadership, Hamas has launched thousands of rockets into Israeli territory, targeting civilian populations. These indiscriminate attacks have resulted in numerous casualties and significant damage to infrastructure.

For instance, during Operation Protective Edge in 2014, over 4,500 rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel. Hamas also has a long history of using suicide bombers to attack Israeli civilians. One of the most notorious attacks occurred in March 2004, when a double suicide bombing at the port of Ashdod killed 10 Israelis and injured dozens. Haniyeh planned and endorsed these tactics.

Haniyeh played a crucial role in orchestrating the Great March of Return in 2018, which involved tens of thousands of Gazans attempting to breach the border fence with Israel. While framed as peaceful protests, many of these events turned violent, with armed participants attacking Israeli soldiers and civilians.

This campaign resulted in numerous deaths and injuries. Hamas, under Haniyeh’s leadership, has been responsible for the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers. The most notable case is the abduction of Gilad Shalit in 2006, who was held captive for over five years before being released in a prisoner exchange deal – Yahya Sinwar, now Hamas’s Gaza military commander, being among those released.

Several Western countries – including the US, Egypt, and Qatar – have expressed concerns that Haniyeh’s assassination undermines ongoing peace negotiations and escalates regional tensions. For instance, Egypt’s Foreign Ministry labeled the killing as a “dangerous escalation,” while Qatar condemned it as a “heinous crime” and a “blatant violation of international and humanitarian law.” These reactions, however, ignore the broader implications of allowing a terrorist leader to operate with impunity.

It is essential to recognize that Israel’s actions are not acts of aggression but of self-defense. Eliminating Haniyeh sends a solid message to terrorist organizations worldwide: Their leaders are not beyond reach. This act demonstrates Israel’s advanced intelligence capabilities and its unwavering commitment to neutralizing threats to its national security and the safety of its citizens.

The international community must consider who aligns themselves with individuals like Haniyeh. Those who see him as a friend or ally are, in effect, partners in terror.

Critics argue that Haniyeh’s assassination could derail peace talks and provoke further violence. While it is true that any significant military action can have immediate repercussions, the long-term benefits of removing a key critical figure outweigh the temporary instability. Haniyeh’s death disrupts Hamas’s leadership structure and diminishes its operational capabilities, thereby weakening the organization’s ability to carry out future attacks.

Furthermore, this assassination aligns with the broader global effort to combat terrorism. The West, particularly nations like the US, which have been victims of terrorism, should understand the necessity of such actions. The fight against terror requires a united front and a willingness to take decisive measures against those who perpetuate violence and chaos.

Israel’s alleged targeted killing of Ismail Haniyeh should be viewed not as a provocative act but as a necessary step in the fight against terrorism.