What’s next after Sinwar’s death

By Mike Froman President, Council on Foreign Relations

On Wednesday, Israeli forces in southern Gaza killed Yahya Sinwar, the leader of Hamas and the architect of the October 7 attacks. Sinwar’s death fulfills one of Israel’s top goals in Gaza, but whether it marks a turning point in the war in Gaza or the broader situation in the Middle East remains unclear. Will it make a ceasefire and hostage exchange more or less likely? Will it mean the end of Hamas as an organized military and political entity? Will it allow Israel to declare victory, move to a new phase in the stabilization of Gaza, and redeploy more military assets to the north?

For context and historical perspective, I spoke with Steven Cook , CFR’s Eni Enrico Mattei Senior Fellow for Middle East and Africa Studies. As Steven notes, those hoping that Sinwar’s death will precipitate the collapse of Hamas—or lead to a hostage deal and a ceasefire—are likely to be disappointed. This is a dynamic situation, and we will continue to provide CFR’s analysis of it here and at CFR.org.

What does Sinwar’s death mean for the Israel-Hamas war?

The Israelis have done a lot of damage to Hamas, killing more than half of their estimated twenty-thousand-plus fighters in arms at the start of the war last October, and the killing of Yahya Sinwar is a major blow. It would seem an opportune moment for the Israelis to declare victory and go home, ceding the Gaza Strip to the stewardship of a combination of the United Nations, Europeans, and Arab states for reconstruction and redevelopment. That is the hope, at least of many outside actors, including U.S. and UN officials and other cease-fire advocates.

However, it is important to understand that while Hamas is on the ropes, the history of the conflict suggests that Sinwar’s killing will possibly not change all that much. After all, the Israelis have killed Hamas leaders before with no appreciable effect on their overall security. Throughout the last year, Yahya Sinwar proved that he and Hamas were formidable adversaries of the more powerful Israel Defense Forces, masterfully drawing the Israeli military into a difficult urban fight that killed a large number of Israeli soldiers and was destined to damage Israel’s international standing. It is possible that after Sinwar’s death, Hamas’s violence will wane for some time, but it seems unlikely that the organization will completely collapse. Even if it did, armed cadres of the group will likely continue to fight. Over the medium to long term, a new group could emerge to carry on the resistance.   What does this mean for the issue of hostages, prisoner swaps, and any moves toward a ceasefire?

U.S. President Joe Biden’s statement about Sinwar’s killing suggests that there is now an opportunity to end the war, which would presumably mean the return of hostages, estimated at more than one hundred. Needless to say, Hamas’s ability to demand the release of large numbers of Palestinian prisoners has diminished dramatically. Indeed, Israelis have floated the idea of granting amnesty to anyone in Gaza who releases a hostage. They clearly believe that Hamas is so broken without Sinwar and others, it cannot negotiate, and that its grip on the Gazan population is so weak that the Israelis can go straight to the Palestinian population. It is hard to imagine a formal cease-fire now. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and especially his rightwing partners in his governing coalition have maintained that Hamas needs to be defeated and that military pressure—as opposed to a negotiated deal, which many Israelis support—is the best way to bring hostages home. Given this, a more realistic expectation is that members of the government will continue to advocate that Israel press its military advantage in Gaza. That is setting up Israel for a re-occupation of Gaza, which some of the prime minister’s partners no doubt support. Left out, of course, are the roughly two million Palestinians of Gaza who have suffered enormously. A cease-fire would benefit them the most, but Israeli political dynamics are such that the Israelis could choose to continue the fight despite holding such a dominant position.

You can read the full story at CFR.org. 

(Photo: Orin Ziv/AFP/Getty Images)

OTHER ANALYSIS FROM THIS WEEK

How Vulnerable Is Israel to Iran’s Attacks?

By Jonathan Panter

An Iron Dome anti-missile battery in southern Israel, April 2024. (Hannah McKay/Reuters)

Israel and its allies have successfully defended against Iran’s missile attacks thus far, but it has required an extraordinary level of cooperation, and the challenge is likely to only get harder if the conflict escalates. Get the analysis

What Are Iran’s Nuclear and Missile Capabilities?

By Jonathan Masters and Will Merrow

Iran’s nuclear program and missile arsenal have garnered increased international scrutiny amid its flaring conflict with Israel. Read the analysis

CFR In-Person Public Events

CFR-Grand Valley State University Election 2024 U.S. Foreign Policy Public Program

Monday, October 21, 2024, at 6:00 p.m.–7:30 p.m. (EDT) Register

CFR-Franklin & Marshall College Election 2024 U.S. Foreign Policy Public Program

Tuesday, October 22, 2024, at 7:30 p.m.–9:00 p.m. (EDT) Register

Would Trump Abandon Taiwan?

By David Sacks

Taiwan must contend not just with the prospect of a second Donald J. Trump presidency, but with a broader U.S. shift towards weaker regional engagement. Read more on Asia Unbound

China’s Leaders’ Expectations of Another Trump Term

By Rush Doshi

Despite deep divisions in American politics, Democrats and Republicans now broadly agree on the need to outcompete China. That united front will be undermined if Trump is elected again. Nobody grasps this better than China’s leaders. Read more in the New York Times 

Hurricane Milton’s Damage and Climate Preparedness

By Alice C. Hill

The record-breaking storm was the second major hurricane to hit Florida in less than two weeks. Experts say climate change has worsened the wreckage of such events, straining government efforts to respond. Read the expert opinion

The Time Is Right for Ally-Shoring

By John Austin and Elaine Dezenski

As the global economy realigns, the next U.S. president should formalize a liberal economic bloc of allied countries to stand up against authoritarian rivals. Read more from RealEcon

National Security Debate on Health Enters New Phase

By David Fidler

Controversies about national security and global health are changing in a post-pandemic, geopolitical, and warming world. Read more on Think Global Health

How Far-Right Election Gains Are Changing Europe

By Dr. Liana Fix and Sophia Winograd

Far-right parties are making significant strides in Austria and Germany, pulling European Union policies in a rightward direction. Read the expert brief

Assessing the Sahel’s Military Juntas

By Ebenezer Obadare

Across the Sahel, the unpleasant experience of the military-led states has confirmed what experts have long recognized: that military rule is no solution to the problem of state fragility. Read more on Africa in Transition

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT

2024 Stephen C. Freidheim Symposium on Global Economics 

In the first session of the symposium, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen discussed different perspectives on U.S. international economic policy. In the second, panelists explored two core mandates of the U.S. Treasury Department: safeguarding national security and promoting economic growth. Watch both discussions

CFR-Georgia Institute of Technology Election 2024 U.S. Foreign Policy Public Forum

Panelists discussed the trade-offs presented by different policy options both locally and globally and provided context on the international issues, choices, and challenges facing the next president. Watch the discussion

What Does the World Think of the United States in 2024?

CFR’s Global Board of Advisors explored external perceptions of current affairs in the United States, with a particular focus on the upcoming 2024 presidential election. Watch the discussion

Tell Us Which Conflicts to Watch for in 2025

Now accepting submissions for the 2025 Preventive Priorities Survey (PPS)

 The Center for Preventive Action is compiling its seventeenth annual Preventive Priorities Survey for 2025. The PPS ranks conflicts and sources of instability around the world based on their likelihood and their potential harm to U.S. national interests. The goal of the PPS is to help policymakers prioritize and prevent international conflicts.

We want your suggestions: What conflicts should we include in this year’s survey? Submit suggestions