The Death of the Hamas Leader Will Not Bring Peace

Hours after the confirmation of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar's death, the Israeli Prime Minister made a statement: “To the people of Gaza, I have a simple message: this war can end tomorrow. It can end if Hamas lays down its arms and returns our hostages.” Netanyahu's words suggest that the future of Gaza and the region is now in Hamas's hands, as if the group had any real choice. The false sense of control offered by Netanyahu's speech completely ignores the fact that he himself has opened new battlefronts in Lebanon and against Iran, actions that only prolong the conflict. If Netanyahu's true aim were immediate peace, he would not be escalating the conflict in all directions. By placing responsibility in the hands of a terrorist group, he attempts to shield himself while continuing to expand military operations, eliminating leaders and provoking other regional forces. Pretending that Hamas has any power to decide while Israel strikes on multiple fronts with catastrophic humanitarian consequences is, at the very least, an insult to the intelligence of anyone following the situation.

Netanyahu has clear reasons to feign an openness to negotiation. Over the past twelve months, both he and Hamas have added new conditions for a ceasefire in a blame game that has only prolonged the conflict. Now, with international pressure, including from Western countries, increasing due to Israel's actions that have resulted in a humanitarian crisis in Lebanon — with over 1.2 million displaced and even impacts on the UN peacekeeping mission (UNIFIL) — Netanyahu needs to show the world a more “cautious” face.

By shifting the responsibility for ending the war onto Hamas, right after the death of the group’s top leader, Netanyahu seeks political shielding. After all, if the hostages are executed, whether out of revenge or due to the chaos caused by Hamas’s temporary lack of leadership, he can claim it wasn’t his fault. It's a calculated move to distance himself from the aftermath.

I’m not saying this because I disagree that Netanyahu's proposed solution would be ideal — indeed, Hamas releasing the hostages and avoiding further civilian bloodshed in Gaza would be the best-case scenario. But the truth is, Netanyahu himself is nowhere near wanting that. The signs are clear: he is more interested in maintaining the conflict, continuing his military operations, and reinforcing his political position. This entire performance of “willingness to negotiate” is nothing but a show for international eyes, while he continues with his war agenda.

If Netanyahu’s real goal were simply to eliminate leadership and destroy Hamas's military capabilities, he wouldn’t have opened another battlefront in Lebanon. This move makes it clear that the war is far from over, as the plan goes beyond eliminating Hamas: it aims to eliminate all threats that Israel considers permanent, such as Hezbollah. Even after the death of Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah and other leaders, the group showed that it still has the ability to attack Israel, as evidenced by the recent strikes on a military base in Binyamina, Haifa, which resulted in the deaths of Israeli soldiers. It is evident that Netanyahu is not looking for a quick or peaceful solution, but rather the continuation of a prolonged state of war.

What further reinforces the idea that Netanyahu's goal is not de-escalation is Israel’s attacks on Iran, even after the theocratic regime made it clear that it had abandoned its “strategic patience” stance. For years, Israel has launched operations against Iran — whether through cyberattacks on its nuclear infrastructure or by eliminating key figures in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. And how did Iran respond? By arming its regional militias and proxies, such as Hezbollah.

But in April 2024, the dynamics shifted: after an attack on its embassy in Syria, Iran responded directly, launching an offensive against Israel with around 300 drones and missiles, a clear message that the era of patience had ended. What did Israel do? Completely ignored the warning and doubled down on provocation by assassinating Hamas's previous leader, Ismail Haniyeh, in the Iranian capital during the inauguration of Iran’s new president.

Therefore, claiming that Israel is seeking immediate peace while taking deliberate measures to inflame its enemies and shifting the responsibility of ending the war onto them goes beyond cynicism; it is a calculated strategy to keep the conflict alive.

Speaking of cynicism — or perhaps naivety, or even wishful thinking — another stance that stands out is that of the US government, which seems to cling to the hope that Sinwar's death would open a window for negotiating a ceasefire. This is the same government that, on numerous occasions, has vetoed ceasefire proposals in the UN Security Council, while sending the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, capable of carrying more than 60 aircraft, and recently deploying the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile system, designed to intercept and destroy short, medium, and intermediate-range ballistic missiles during their terminal phase, bolstering Israel’s defense. All this while Netanyahu threatens to turn Lebanon into a new Gaza.

What we have here is a government that is either incredibly naive or desperately trying to sell any shred of ceasefire hope as a "diplomatic victory" for Biden — just days before the elections.

More than ever, the chessboard of the conflict seems fully set. Although Netanyahu has fulfilled his promise of revenge made on 7 October 2023, he is far from eradicating Hamas, as I highlighted in my article “Twelve Months Later: What Has Israel Really Achieved?”. Contrary to what the United States publicly suggests, Yahya Sinwar's death is unlikely to pave the way for a ceasefire. And despite what Netanyahu claims, the future of Gaza is not in Hamas's hands. Israel's actions on other fronts, such as expanding the conflict into Lebanon and attacking Iran, make it clear that the long-term goal is to guarantee the security of the Israeli state. However, that goal is still far from being achieved, as enemies remain capable of retaliation, maintaining instability and prolonging the war, undermining any chance of a quick resolution.

The idea that Hamas has control over what will happen in the region is as illusory as believing that Israel’s security can be guaranteed solely by military force. The war is not just against Hamas but against a range of regional actors, such as Hezbollah, who continue to demonstrate the ability to cause significant damage. By ignoring clear signs of escalation, such as Iran’s direct responses, Netanyahu shows that his interest is not de-escalation but rather the maintenance of a prolonged conflict that serves both his security objectives and his political position. The board is now more visible, but peace, more than ever, remains a missing piece.

• This article was originally written in Portuguese and published at CNN Portugal under the title "A Morte do líder do Hamas n?o trará paz".