The chief of the political bureau of the Palestinian Resistance Movement Hamas Ismail Haniyeh was martyred in Tehran early on Wednesday by the Israeli regime.
To know more about the consequences of this act of terror, we reached out to Ivan Zakharov, Cheif of the West Asia (Middle East) section of Spunik.
Following is the full text of the interview:
Why does Israel resort to cowardly terrorist acts? Are these actions the result of Israel's weakness and failure in achieving its goals on the battlefield?
Israel resorts to targeted assassinations of Hezbollah and Hamas leaders for strategic purposes. Such actions cause organizations to be cut off, their actions to be confused and their combat effectiveness to be reduced. Major military conflicts bring risks and losses for both sides. And targeted attacks against leaders and key infrastructure can prevent escalation, save lives, and end conflicts with minimal casualties. This is what they think in Tel Aviv. But the reaction of the Arab world and its allies is already clear: such terrorist acts will not go unanswered. We see that Israel has once again escalated the tension in the Middle East region.
On one hand, Israel and America urge for negotiations, truce and peace, but on the other hand they commit such provocative actions. What regional consequences can such actions have?
The actions of Israel and the United States, which call for negotiations and a peaceful settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, but at the same time attempts to assassinate the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah, can lead to a number of complex regional consequences.
First, such attacks can escalate violence. Removing the leaders of groups often leads to immediate backlash from their supporters, which can lead to attacks on Israeli and American targets.
Second, it can increase anti-Western sentiments in the region. Local people may see such actions as evidence of aggressive policies by Israel and its allies, fueling support for radical movements and complicating the achievement of peace agreements.
Third, such actions risk undermining trust in the peace negotiation process. Negotiating partners may question the sincerity of Israel's and the United States' intentions, making it difficult to engage in constructive dialogue and create pathways to a peaceful settlement. Consequently, while targeted killings may be effective in reducing specific threats in the short term, in the long term they can make peaceful conflict resolution more difficult and destabilize the region.
How do you evaluate the double standards of Westerners towards the issue of terrorism, especially state terrorism?
The dual approach of the West to terrorism, especially state-sponsored terrorism, has been very controversial and has had several consequences.
On the one hand, Western countries such as the United States and its allies actively support the global fight against terrorism and emphasize the importance of international law and human rights. They are trying to create a coalition to deal with terrorist organizations and carry out anti-terrorist operations.
On the other hand, these same western countries are often accused of being selective and incoherent. For example, the United States and its allies sometimes resort to methods they themselves condemn, such as targeted assassinations, drones, and meddling in other countries' affairs. This may be seen as a manifestation of double standards, especially when they cooperate with countries accused of violating human rights for strategic or economic interests.
This dual approach complicates the global fight against terrorism for several reasons. First, it undermines Western moral leadership by creating the impression that powerful states can act with impunity. This leads to mistrust and conflict on the part of other countries and organizations. Second, when local people perceive Western actions as aggressive and unjust, it can lead to extremism, which can increase sympathy for terrorist groups. Third, this approach creates problems in negotiations and international coalitions. Counter-terrorism partners may question the sincerity and long-term commitment of Western countries, making it difficult to achieve a coherent strategy and effective cooperation.
Therefore, to overcome these contradictions, the West should strive for more coherent and transparent policies based on respect for international laws and justice. This is the only way to hope to create a stable and effective global system to fight terrorism.
Interview by Payman Yazdani
Your Comment