Dr. Salem AlKetbi is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate
Anyone observing the Middle East understands that Israel’s policy of targeted assassination is neither accidental nor an occasional exception. Instead, it is a deeply entrenched approach within its security establishment and a fundamental pillar of its strategy for confronting terrorist organizations.
Israel’s doctrine is built on the principle of targeted strikes. It considers the elimination of terrorist leaders a recurring necessity, not a circumstantial choice, to weaken its adversaries and prevent them from using bloodshed and chaos as pressure tactics.
Given this established approach, the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31, 2024, was neither an isolated incident nor a routine operation. It was described as the most complex mission, one that bewildered the global intelligence community. This operation served as a vivid embodiment of a long-term strategy, conveying a strong message that Israel’s reach knows no geographical borders when its security is at stake.
Since the 1970s, Israel has consistently signaled that reckoning may be delayed but is never waived. From most capitals that have harbored terrorists, Israel has proven its security apparatus can find its enemies anywhere. Time does not grant immunity.
The complex operation to assassinate Haniyeh demonstrated Mossad’s capabilities. It involved a complete penetration of the intelligence services of a formidable country like Iran, killing its agent and guest under its protection. This was a double-edged message: it showcased Israel’s ability to infiltrate the most secure environments while humiliating those who dare to host its enemies. This operation represents the culmination of a security doctrine that prioritizes deterrence above all political or diplomatic considerations.
Some might ask if all terrorist leaders who are Israel’s enemies are now sentenced to death. In reality, the list is open-ended. Names are shelved, awaiting the right moment. Israel is not in a hurry, but it does not forget. Some leaders may be kept alive not out of mercy, but to be used as bargaining chips in future political or regional deals. Their ultimate fate, however, depends on their actions. They remain alive but doomed to a delayed death, subject to a moment of breach, betrayal, or a direct threat to Israel’s security.
For evidence of the danger in complacency, one need look no further than the events of October 7. That day stood as the ugliest face of organized terrorism, as Hamas pounced on unarmed civilians with a brutality that shattered all illusions. That terrorist act was irrefutable proof that leniency toward evil only breeds greater evil.
Turning a blind eye to the architects of death gives them the chance to repeat massacres. The blood spilled that day was not limited to Israelis; its effects fueled the entire region’s spiral into chaos and instability. This confirms that Israel’s logic in pursuing terrorist leaders is not merely an emotional reaction but a firm conviction. Leaving the snake’s head alive ensures the venom will be produced anew.
Real deterrence can only be achieved through a strict policy that makes every terrorist leader feel sentenced to death, however long it takes or however far they may run.
This leads to a deeper dimension. Israel does not see these operations as mere reactions to attacks but as part of its long-term national security doctrine. This harsh policy reflects how Israel rightfully sees itself: a nation surrounded by perils, living amidst a sea of security, military, and ideological threats. Therefore, its persistence in assassination is not a luxury but an integral part of protecting its existence.
Simply put, as long as terrorism raises its head, the Israeli response will remain ready. As Osama Hamdan, a Hamas leader, once said, “The battlefield is the judge.” So far, the field has been settled in favor of the long arm that does not hesitate to strike.
Despite the clarity of this approach, some still doubt its effectiveness. History, however, proves otherwise. Removing leaders creates a vacuum, disrupts ranks, and sows fear in the hearts of those who remain. The real message is not in the number of corpses but in shattering any sense of security, even for those hiding behind palaces in regional capitals. The sword remains raised. Though time may pass, the outcome is the same: no immunity for Israel’s enemies, wherever they are.
Despite the diplomatic complexities that accompany foreign operations, Israeli pragmatism never hesitates when weighed against national security. The country has proven ready to bear temporary political costs to remove a permanent strategic threat. This is what makes the assassination policy an essential, indispensable pillar.
Given the constant dangers facing its citizens, Israel will be compelled to maintain this approach and may even intensify it as threats mount. Security in this region is not a static equation but a daily struggle against an adaptive enemy that constantly seeks new loopholes.
The message the Israelis sends by continuing to assassinate terrorist leaders and their supporters is unmistakable. Deterrence is not achieved by statements or maneuvers but through decisive action that reminds everyone: the Israeli hand, however long it may take, is never paralyzed nor restrained.
