After Doha Strike, Hamas’s Future May Hinge on One Gaza Commander
The strike on Hamas leadership in Qatar, if successful, could leave a single, "more moderate" commander in charge in Gaza, presenting both an opportunity and a major risk for a potential hostage deal.
The results of the dramatic "Peak of Fire" strike against senior Hamas leaders in Qatar remain unconfirmed, but if successful, the operation would decapitate the organization's foreign leadership. This follows a series of other senior assassinations since the war began, leaving a vacuum at the top of the organization's political and military command. This raises new questions about the future of a hostage deal, as a single, powerful figure remains in Gaza: Ezz a-Din Haddad.
The 55-year-old Haddad, one of the last remaining senior commanders from Hamas's "founding generation," is now considered the de facto leader of the military wing in Gaza. He took over after the assassination of his predecessor, Mohammed Sinwar, in May of this year.
Israeli security officials have noted a key difference in approach between the two men. While Sinwar, brother of the late Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, took a hardline and uncompromising stance against a deal on Israel's terms, Haddad is seen as a more "moderate" and "pragmatic" figure. Sources believe he is more attuned to the suffering of the people of Gaza from the prolonged war.
Haddad has been instrumental in rebuilding Hamas's command and control capabilities, particularly in Gaza City, and has led the rehabilitation of the organization's tunnel network. He has served as a central point of contact for remaining field commanders, maintaining morale and operational changes throughout the war.
With the potential elimination of the organization's foreign leadership, Haddad could be left alone at the top, a situation that presents both a potential opportunity and a significant risk for Israel. His more measured approach to negotiations could offer a new opening for a deal. However, any attempt to eliminate him could be a double-edged sword. Without a unified leader to serve as a central address for negotiations, the remaining fragmented command could collapse entirely, leaving no single point of contact for a hostage release. In such a scenario, Israel might be forced to negotiate with individual, isolated groups holding hostages, complicating any deal and making a full exchange significantly more difficult.