Follow us on social

Assassination of Hamas leader in Iran puts new president in a trap

Assassination of Hamas leader in Iran puts new president in a trap

Depending on how Pezeshkian responds, it may force the US to get directly involved in defense of Israel

Analysis | Middle East

Ismail Haniyeh, the political leader of Hamas, was assassinated in Tehran, widely believed by Israel. He was in Tehran to attend the ceremonies marking inauguration of Iran’s new President, Dr. Masoud Pezeshkian. The two men met before Haniyeh was killed.

As of this writing, Israel has not commented on the killing or the allegations that it was behind it.

In assassinating Haniyeh, Israel would have struck at two targets, not one. The second one is the new Pezeshkian administration. On the day the reformist President was taking office, a foreign leader and an ally of Iran is assassinated, and as the head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, he must address a security crisis with international dimensions and implications.

If Saeed Jalili, Pezeshkian’s opponent in the second round of Iran’s presidential elections, had won, given his radical and extremist positions, and his bombastic style, it would have helped Israel in its attempts to convince the international community that engaging Iran diplomatically will not be fruitful, and the country must be put under maximum pressure.

But Pezeshkian is a moderate, and although he has repeatedly condemned the United States for its support of Israel in its war in Gaza, for imposing harsh economic sanctions on Iran, and exiting the nuclear treaty with Iran known officially as JCPOA, he is also pragmatic in seeking a dialogue with the U.S. During his campaign, Pezeshkian stated repeatedly that he would pursue negotiations with the United States, a position apparently supported by the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in order to get the economic sanctions lifted.

Dialogue between Iran and the United States is, however, the last thing that Israel, and particularly Benjamin Netanyahu, wants at this stage. If anything, Netanyahu would expand the war to Lebanon in hopes that Iran will react strongly and enter the war directly. Neither Hezbollah nor Iran wants a war with Israel at this stage, but no one should be under the illusion that if Israel begins a full-scale war with Lebanon and Hezbollah, Iran will sit it out.

Unlike Hamas, a Sunni group that has had differences with Iran over the past twenty years, particularly when it refused to support Bashar al-Assad in Syria during the war there that angered Tehran, Hezbollah is a Shiite organization and Iran’s most important asset in the Middle East. If Israel starts waging a full-scale war against Lebanon, and the Islamic Republic does not intervene to defend Hezbollah, it will lose all credibility with its allies throughout the Middle East. Iran has already been criticized by the Houthis in Yemen for not defending Hamas in Gaza.

Since Iran has not shown any inclination towards starting a direct war with Israel, the next best scenario for Israel is to trap it in an untenable position. Assassinating the leader of an ally, particularly in Tehran in the evening of the day in which a new administration took the oath of office, is that trap. It has put President Pezeshkian and his allies in an extremely difficult situation.

If Iran does nothing, it will be mocked throughout the region. Tehran’s radicals will also relentlessly attack Pezeshkian for supposedly being “soft” or a “sell-out,” trying to cripple, if not topple, his administration and his programs before they have even been started. He is already under attacks by the extremists for seeking negotiations with the United States.

If Iran does react strongly, it will add to the mountain of problems that it is facing. This is not what Pezeshkian and his lieutenants want or had hoped for, but they may be forced to act, knowing that, depending on how they respond, it may force the United States to get directly involved in defense of Israel, at the time when the Pezeshkian administration is hoping to re-start the negotiations with it. Either way, Israel would be temporarily a “winner.”

Khamenei has issued a statement, condemning the assassination, and promising revenge: “The brave and prominent Palestinian mujahideen leader Ismail Haniyeh joined Allah at dawn last night and the great resistance front is in mourning. The criminal and terrorist Zionist regime martyred our dear guest in our house and made us bereaved, but it also prepared the ground for a harsh punishment for itself.”

In his own statement, Pezeshkian said, “The Islamic Republic of Iran will defend its territorial integrity, honor, dignity and pride, and make the terrorist occupiers regret their cowardly action.”

Meanwhile this morning, the U.S. carried out a strike in Iraq, attacking a base south of Baghdad that is controlled by the pro-Iran Shiite group, Popular Mobilization Forces. It killed four members of the group and wounded four others. This comes after U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria came under attack last week. Israel also attacked Beirut and killed Fuad Shukr, Hezbollah's most senior military commander.

The repercussions of the assassination, if it leads to a wider war in the region, for the U.S. presidential elections will also be important. If a wider war involving Iran, Israel, and Hezbollah is started, the Biden administration will surely take Israel’s side. But this will create severe problems for Vice President Kamala Harris who is trying to distinguish herself from Biden and his unconditional support for Israel that has caused deep fissures within the Democratic Party.

Given that, according to many reports, last week’s meeting between Netanyahu and Harris did not go as Netanyahu wanted, which had irked him since Harris had called for an immediate ceasefire, a new war is also the last thing that Harris would or should want.

Thus, the assassination will undoubtedly increase tensions in the region, even if it does not lead to a wider war, because it will give rise to a precarious situation whereby the most minor mistake by any side may create a huge explosion. The tensions may weaken the rejuvenated moderates and Reformists in Iran, and setback what Pezeshkian has planned to do for both the domestic and regional affairs. This will not bode well for the region.


An Iranian man holds a picture of Palestinian group Hamas' top leader Ismail Haniyeh, during a gathering following Haniyeh's killing, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Tehran, Iran July 31, 2024. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS

Analysis | Middle East
Lockheed Martin NASA
Top photo credit: Lockheed Martin Space Systems in Littleton, Colo. Photo Credit: (NASA/Joel Kowsky)

The Pentagon spent $4 trillion over 5 years. Contractors got 54% of it.

Military Industrial Complex

Advocates of ever-higher Pentagon spending frequently argue that we must throw more money at the department to “support the troops.” But recent budget proposals and a new research paper issued by the Quincy Institute and the Costs of War Project at Brown University suggest otherwise.

The paper, which I co-authored with Stephen Semler, found that 54% of the Pentagon’s $4.4 trillion in discretionary spending from 2020 to 2024 went to military contractors. The top five alone — Lockheed Martin ($313 billion), RTX (formerly Raytheon, $145 billion), Boeing ($115 billion), General Dynamics ($116 billion), and Northrop Grumman ($81 billion) – received $771 billion in Pentagon contracts over that five year period.

keep readingShow less
China Malaysia
Top photo credit: Pearly Tan and Thinaah Muralitharan of Malaysia compete in the Women's Doubles Round Robin match against Nami Matsuyama and Chiharu Shida of Japan on day five of the BWF Sudirman Cup Finals 2025 at Fenghuang Gymnasium on May 1, 2025 in Xiamen, Fujian Province of China. (Photo by Zheng Hongliang/VCG )

How China is 'eating our lunch' with soft power

Asia-Pacific

In June 2025, while U.S. and Philippine forces conducted joint military drills in the Sulu Sea and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reaffirmed America’s commitment to the Indo-Pacific at Singapore’s Shangri-La Dialogue, another story deserving of attention played out less visibly.

A Chinese-financed rail project broke ground in Malaysia with diplomatic fanfare and local celebration. As Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim noted, the ceremony “marks an important milestone” in bilateral cooperation. The contrast was sharp: Washington sent ships and speeches; Beijing sent people and money.

keep readingShow less
President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and President of Russia Vladimir Putin
Top photo credit: President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and President of Russia Vladimir Putin appear on screen. (shutterstock/miss.cabul)

Westerners foolishly rush to defend Azerbaijan against Russia

Europe

The escalating tensions between Russia and Azerbaijan — marked by tit-for-tat arrests, accusations of ethnic violence, and economic sparring — have tempted some Western observers to view the conflict as an opportunity to further isolate Moscow.

However, this is not a simple narrative of Azerbaijan resisting Russian dominance. It is a complex struggle over energy routes, regional influence, and the future of the South Caucasus, where Western alignment with Baku risks undermining critical priorities, including potential U.S.-Russia engagement on Ukraine and arms control.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.