Following coward assassination of the chief of the political bureau of the Palestinian Resistance Movement Hamas Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran early on Wednesday by the Israeli regime, we reached out to Shireen Tahmaasb Hunter, Professor of Political Science at Georgetown University in the US and discussed the issue and consequences of such an unlawful terrorist act with her.
Here is the full text of the interview:
Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in Iran when the inauguration of Iran’s new president was going on. What can be Netanyahu's goals to choose this place and time to commit this act?
In my view two main objectives of the terror of Haniyeh in Iran were: First, to show the reach of the Israeli intelligence network in Iran and send a message to Iran that similar acts could happen in the future; Second to undermine Iran's and its new president's ability to reduce tensions with the West and thus, potentially get some sanction relief. Israel has done this in the past.
Do you see any relation between Israeli failure in Gaza war and Netanyahu’s internal challenges and this assassination?
First one needs to define failure. If by failure you mean that Israel has not been able to subdue Hamas, then Israel has failed. But realistically speaking, Israel has succeeded. Hamas and its bases in Gaza are no longer a significant security threat to Israel. I believe that the main goal of the terror was to show Israel's reach.
What can be the dangerous consequences of this act for the region?
If the cycle of attack and retaliation does not end, eventually War could spread to other states, most notably Lebanon and less likely to Jordan. However, I don't believe that Arab states would get involved in the war. Their silence during the Gaza war shows that they are unwilling to take any risks by defending the Palestinians. In my opinion, the greatest risk is to Iran and could lead even to military confrontation with the US.
Can such a measure be taken without coordination with the US?
Given the stakes involved for the US in an Israeli-Iran confrontation, I doubt that the US was unaware of Israel's plans to kill Haniyeh. However, Israel increasingly acts without taking into account Washington's concerns or interests, because it feels certain that, ultimately, the US will defend it in a potential war with Iran. In short, America's ability to control Israel has been seriously eroded.
How do you assess Israel’s act and Iran’s right to respond based on international law and UN charter?
Clearly, Iran has a right to retaliate against Israel's action. The important question is whether it is in Iran's interest to do so. I doubt that such retaliation would deter future Israeli transgressions. Iran sent missiles and drones into Israel in retaliation for the Israeli attack on its embassy in Damascus. But, Israel, nevertheless, killed Haniyeh in Tehran. In fact, Iranian retaliation could unleash a cycle of attacks and counter-attacks vastly increasing the risk of all out war. This is a time for wisdom and not emotion.
Your Comment