Hamas killed around 1,200 Israelis and took 250 hostage on October 7, 2023, and Israel’s response with air strikes and ground operations is estimated to have killed more than 40,000 people in Gaza so far. But all these deaths — including those of thousands of Palestinian women and children — could ultimately prove less consequential than those of three individuals, news of whose killings became known this week.
Fuad Shukr, a top Hezbollah commander, was killed in Lebanon’s capital Beirut in an Israeli airstrike on July 30. Israel has said Shukr was behind a rocket attack on Israeli-controlled Golan Heights that killed 12 young people over last weekend.
On July 31, Ismail Haniyeh, head of the political bureau of Hamas and the Qatar-based public face of the group, was killed in Tehran where he was attending the inauguration of the new reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian.
Mohammed Deif, the storied Hamas commander who planned the October 7 attacks, was reported to have been killed in an Israeli strike in Gaza on July 13.
A show of Israeli intent
These targeted killings are seen as a huge victory for Israel, which had vowed revenge for the October 7 attacks, a catastrophic failure of its intelligence, operations, and response mechanisms. Its Swords of Iron military offensive in Gaza had the twin objectives of destroying Hamas and freeing the hostages.
By killing Haniyeh and Deif, Israel can claim to have substantially achieved the target of neutralising Hamas. The message for Hamas’ surviving top military leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, would be that Israel has the intent and capability to decapitate the militant group at a time and place of its choosing.
Much was said and written on the failures of Mossad after the October 7 humiliation — the successful strikes is a step towards salvaging the reputational damage that Israel suffered.
A message for Iran
But the killings could have consequences for all of West Asia. By targeting the leaders of Hezbollah and Hamas — both groups are part of the ‘Axis of Resistance’ sponsored by Iran — Israel has redrawn the red lines of the conflict in West Asia. The possibility of all-out war in the region is perhaps the highest now since the October 7 attacks.
Israel had demonstrated its willingness to push harder when it attacked Iranian military officials in an Iranian diplomatic premises in Syria’s capital Damascus in April. Tehran retaliated with a massive aerial attack against Israel that could, however, do only limited damage. Israel then conducted an air strike against Iran — again, with no major casualties.
These events in April signalled Iran’s intent to respond if its military officials were targeted. Israel took the message — Haniyeh was killed while he was inside a building in Tehran, but no Iranian military personnel were harmed in the highly targeted hit.
What it did though, was to expose the vulnerabilities of Iran’s intelligence and security establishment in much the same way as the Hamas attack had exposed and embarrassed the Israelis. Worse, Haniyeh was killed as Tehran hosted foreign leaders and representatives for the inauguration of its new President.
To target Haniyeh in Qatar, an ally of the United States, would have had complicated consequences for Israel. By killing him under the nose of the Iran Revolutionary Guards Corps in Tehran, Israel has sent the message that Iran’s security umbrella cannot protect the leaders of Hamas.
The killing of Fuad Shukr in Hezbollah’s stronghold of Beirut delivers a similar message. The military capabilities of the Iranian proxy in Lebanon across Israel’s northern border are in fact more formidable than those of Hamas.
Options before Tehran
While the three targeted assassinations and Israel’s ruthless military response in Gaza is intended to re-establish its deterrence against Iran and its proxies, Tehran cannot be expected to take it lying down. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Pezeshkian have vowed revenge. Khamenei attended Haniyeh’s funeral in Tehran, and Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim Bin Ahmad Al Thani sat in front during the last rites in Doha, where the body was brought.
There are three scenarios on the possible Iranian response.
FIRST, Iran could consider picking targets on Israeli soil and carry out a repeat of the aerial attacks of April.
SECOND, it could coordinate with its partners in the ‘Axis of Resistance’ — the three Hs, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis — to conduct coordinated attacks on Israeli targets.
THIRD, it might target Israeli officials in third countries, perhaps after waiting for some time.
The view from India
All these three potential options for Iran present concerns for India. The first two scenarios carry the risk of combustion into a broader regional conflict, adversely impacting the safety of Indian citizens in West Asia, and India’s energy security.
About 9 million Indian nationals live and work in the region — these are usually people who are the sole breadwinners for their families, and the largest source of remittances to India. And about two-thirds of India’s crude oil and natural gas imports come from the West Asian region — an outbreak of hostilities will directly impact the price of crude oil.
The third scenario is one with which India is already familiar — the wife of an Israeli diplomat was attacked in New Delhi in 2012 — and which presents a difficult diplomatic challenge.
India has so far made no statements on the volatile situation — New Delhi, which has friends across the region, does not want to get drawn into regional rivalries. It has issued travel advisories for Israel and Lebanon, and Indian airlines have avoided flying in the region.
Other countries in the region have launched efforts to de-escalate the situation. The Saudi, Qatari, and Omani foreign ministers have been in touch with their Iranian counterparts.
The assassinations have almost certainly derailed ongoing efforts for a deal on hostages and ceasefire in Gaza. The conflict has been prolonged further, and Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has been facing tough questions on his leadership, has got some time.
But the immediate diplomatic challenge is to avert full-scale war in the region. Much will depend on how Khamenei and Pezeshkian think and respond to the situation.
