quinta-feira, 17 de outubro de 2024

Death of Yahya Sinwar is boost for Netanyahu but may not end war

 


Analysis

Death of Yahya Sinwar is boost for Netanyahu but may not end war

Jason Burke

International security correspondent

Killing will throw Hamas into disarray and give encouragement to Israeli military and political officials

 

Thu 17 Oct 2024 17.49 CEST

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/17/yahya-sinwar-hamas-gaza-netanyahu-israel-war

 

The death of Yahya Sinwar, the head of Hamas and mastermind of the 7 October attacks, has huge implications for the conflict in Gaza, for Israel’s other campaigns in Lebanon and the occupied West Bank, and for Israel’s domestic politics.

 

There will be the war – or wars – before the killing of the 62-year-old veteran militant and the war(s) after it.

 

One of the biggest immediate impacts will obviously be on Hamas, which has now lost much of its top leadership. Already the head of its military wing in Gaza, Sinwar took charge of the organisation after Ismail Haniyeh, his predecessor, died in a bomb explosion in a government guesthouse in Tehran in July that was blamed on Israel. Other senior officials were killed in Beirut and in Gaza, where Israeli airstrikes successfully targeted military Hamas commanders such as Marwan Issa and Mohammed Deif.

 

Hamas will portray Sinwar as a martyr and look to frame his death in a way that will inspire new volunteers. That he appears to have died fighting on a frontline, with a weapon in his hand, will help this. But whatever the propaganda, the elimination of such a respected leader is unlikely to boost recruitment, and Hamas sorely needs new manpower in Gaza where it has taken heavy casualties.

 

Command in Gaza is likely to pass to Sinwar’s younger brother, Mohammed, 49, who will probably continue the strategy of low-level insurgent resistance to Israel, with a focus on retaining some kind of shadow administrative control in the territory and exploiting international outrage over civilian casualties to put pressure on Israel.

 

But more broadly Hamas will be thrown into disarray. It will now have to find a new overall leader. Sinwar, despite all the authority he had gathered over decades, was a controversial choice and though the succession of his brother would send a powerful message, Mohammed Sinwar would struggle to unify and rally the organisation. Major strategic choices postponed by the appointment of Yahya Sinwar will now have to be made, under great pressure and in the full knowledge that the Israeli security services are capable of tracking and killing even the most senior officials.

 

In Israel, where Benjamin Netanyahu is still blamed by many for the security failures that led to the death of 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and the abduction of 250 in the 7 October attacks, Sinwar’s killing will greatly reinforce the prime minister’s political position and rally his hardline rightwing support base. Netanyahu’s poll ratings were already improving after a series of tactical successes in Lebanon, including the assassination of Hezbollah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah, and quickly there were reports of celebrations in Jerusalem on Thursday.

 

The death of Sinwar will undoubtedly be seen by some Israelis, including many in senior posts in the military, intelligence services and government, as a moment to declare victory in Gaza and end what is widely seen as a draining, if necessary, campaign. But how much real difference this could make on the ground is unclear.

 

One possibility is that ceasefire negotiations will receive a boost now that one of the two individuals who have been accused of blocking any deal is gone. But the attitude of any successor to Sinwar to talks may not be that different, and Netanyahu has always insisted that military pressure is what will bring back the 100 or so hostages in Gaza, of whom only half are thought to still be alive. The chances of Netanyahu now agreeing to release thousands of Palestinian prisoners, including many who have killed Israelis, and make other painful concessions must be slim.

 

There is a possibility that the US could now press Israel to declare an end to its offensive in Gaza – something that would come as a huge relief to Democratic party campaign strategists. Washington has ramped up pressure on Israel in recent days over increasing access to humanitarian aid for the 2.3 million inhabitants of Gaza, most of them displaced many times, who are facing a winter without adequate food, shelter and medication. A recent surge in airstrikes has pushed the total death toll since October last year to more than 42,500.

 

But even if Israel did decide to declare victory in Gaza with the death of Sinwar – something that analysts have long predicted – it may not mean the dawning of the “day after”. Israeli officials have made clear their military control and operations will continue in Gaza for as long as they deem them necessary, and no one has yet come up with a new political set-up in Gaza that might be acceptable to all parties.

 

Israel has already switched its focus to the battle against Hezbollah in Lebanon, and more broadly against Iran across the region. Netanyahu has so far rejected any ceasefire in the north, in the probably justified belief that Israel has the upper hand, and is yet to order retaliation for the barrage of 180 missiles launched at Israel by Iran earlier this month. This riposte will undoubtedly come.

 

The killing of Sinwar will further boost the confidence of Israeli military, intelligence and political officials who have already been greatly encouraged by their recent successes. Much of Israel’s strategic thinking is dominated by the need to restore what it sees as deterrence necessary to its survival, and to permanently weaken Iran.

 

Sinwar’s elimination will be emotionally satisfying for many Israelis, politically useful for Netanyahu and his supporters and a major blow for Hamas, but it is unlikely to bring the multiple conflicts under way in the Middle East to a sudden end.

Britain's race problem: what politicians aren't telling you about multiculturalism

Recession and a deadlocked government: Is the German economy going down ...

Reports of Hamas leader's death 'bring fears of more fighting in Lebanon...

Migration policy hardens across EU: German 'knee-jerk' measures, Italy in uncharted legal territory

EU leaders talk tough on migration at the European Council Summit • FRAN...

Canada turning away more foreigners amid rise in anti-immigration sentiment

 


Canada turning away more foreigners amid rise in anti-immigration sentiment

This article is more than 1 month old

Ratio of refused visitor visas to approved ones was higher in recent months than any point since height of the pandemic

 

Leyland Cecco in Toronto

Tue 3 Sep 2024 19.43 CEST

https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/sep/03/canada-trudeau-immigration-limits

 

Canada is taking steps, both official and unofficial, to curb the number of people coming to the country, highlighting the way in which immigration has become a political flashpoint ahead of a federal election.

 

According to figures obtained by Reuters, the ratio of refused visitor visa applications to approved ones was higher in recent months than at any point since the height of the pandemic. Immigration officials rejected more applications than they approved in January, February, May and June 2024.

 

At the same time, the number of approved study and work permits dropped. And in July, Canada refused entry to nearly 6,000 foreign travellers, including students, workers and tourists – the most since at least January 2019. Reuters reported the shift appears to be informal, and not dictated by a change in policy.

 

Recent polling has shown a sharp change in how Canadians perceive of immigration, amid a mounting cost of living crisis. One immigration lawyer in Nova Scotia said the firm has seen an increase in rejections – and mounting hostility towards the firm’s clients.

 

“These are things people have said to us – about barring people from coming here or kicking them out – they likely wouldn’t have felt comfortable saying a few years ago. But now they say it to us, knowing exactly what sort of work we do.”

 

Last week, the immigration minister, Marc Miller, said his ministry would reassess the number of people applying for permanent residency.

 

“Now it’s time to take a look at them and put real options on the table for the prime minister and for other cabinet ministers to look at, and not cosmetic changes simply to deal with public opinion. Real significant change,” Miller told CTV News.

 

That same week, the prime minister, Justin Trudeau, said his government would scale back the controversial temporary foreign workers following a surge in applications. The program was recently condemned by a UN special rapporteur for being a “breeding ground for contemporary forms of slavery”.

 

Last year, employers were approved to hire 239,646 temporary foreign workers – more than double the 108,988 hired in 2018, according to Employment and Social Development Canada.

 

Employers are increasingly using the program to fill positions in new sectors, including in fast food and construction. For example, the number of people hired for low-wage jobs in the healthcare sector is up more than 15,000% since 2018.

 

Trudeau said employers in sectors where the unemployment rate is 6% or higher, will not be able to hire low-wage TFW, with an exception granted for “food security sectors” like agriculture and food and fish processing. His government has also approved a carve out for the construction and healthcare sectors.

 

The prime minister also mused about reducing the number of permanent residents Canada accepts each year, dramatically upending years of increased immigration levels under his tenure.

 

“Canada remains a place that is positive in its support for immigration, but also responsible in the way we integrate and make sure there’s pathways to success for everyone who comes to Canada,” he told reporters last week following a cabinet retreat.

 

With a federal election due within the next year, political leaders have sparred over immigration, with the Conservatives, who lead in the polls, accusing Trudeau’s government of letting in too many people too quickly.

 

Trudeau and Miller have defended the need for elevated immigration as critical part of Canada’s economic growth strategy, but both have conceded the volume of immigrants – in addition to a lack of federal and provincial investment in infrastructure – has contributed to a mounting crisis.

 

In late 2023, the federal government said it would freeze permanent resident targets over the next three years to ensure inflows were “sustainable”. There is an aim to bring in 485,000 permanent residents in 2024, and 500,000 in both 2025 and 2026. Those projected numbers are a more than 50% increase from the 296,000 permanent residents welcomed in 2016.

 

The Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, whose party has a sizeable lead in the polls, said last week the “radical and out of control” Liberal government has “destroyed our immigration system”.

 

Poilievre said Trudeau was growing the population at a rate far faster than houses were being build and pledged if victorious in the election, his party would tie Canada’s population growth rate to a level below the number of houses built.