Hamas has described the assassination of its political leader Ismail Haniyeh in Iran’s capital as a grave escalation that will not go unanswered, but how will the targeted killing affect the region’s tension levels?

The strike undermined Iran, and crucially its ability to protect its allies which means the country is likely to retaliate. Experts believe the attack will have less impact on Hamas leadership, which will regroup behind a different political leader, after all Haniyeh was not involved in the group’s on the ground efforts in Gaza. 

Former intelligence advisor to the UK cabinet office, Dr Lynette Nusbacher said, “The strike sends a message to the world and region that they are not safe, and it humiliates Iran.”

IRGC capabilities were revealed in April when it launched more than 330 drones and missiles against Israel, but very few hit their targets, and Western powers intervened to protect Israel.

It is not clear how much more Iran has left in its stockpile, but its proxies in Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon will be poised to respond. Analysts are predicting a spike in rockets from Hezbollah in Lebanon fired at Israeli targets.

Nusbacher said: “The Iranians could decide that this is the moment they are going to unleash hell on Israel.”

However, she added, “If they use Hezbollah as the means to create destruction in Israel, they lose it. It's their one shot.”

The killing of the Hamas chief demonstrates Israel’s military strength over Iran and comes after the IDF targeted Hezbollah’s Fuad Shukr in Beirut.

The precision attack used the same technology that the IDF deploys in Gaza – for example, destroying one room of a school to kill Hamas operatives, the IDF can inflict minimal damage with maximised impact. The long-range targeting of Haniyeh does not appear to have had the same collateral damage as the strike on Shukr in Beirut which levelled several buildings and reportedly injured dozens.

Israeli intelligence has been following Haniyeh since October 7. The political chief of Hamas was based in Qatar, making him out of reach, but news of his visit for the inauguration of President Masoud Pezeshkian was widely shared on social media and put Haniyeh in Israel’s crosshairs.

A strike inside Iran is more technically challenging than hitting Qatar, but a strike in Qatar would cause a major upset with Israel’s allies. "It was the political and not the technical constraints that protected Haniyeh from an Israeli strike so far,” Nusbacher explained.

“Being able to deliver a precision strike in Tehran is a lot more difficult than delivering a precision strike in Qatar – it's a long way away, there is an active set of intelligence services in Iran, it is less open and less of a point for moving around the world. The entire national security culture of Iran is, to some extent, acting out of institutional paranoia and, as we see today, a genuine assessment of threat,” said Nusbacher.

Andrew Fox, researcher at the Henry Jackson Society and former paratrooper, agreed with this assessment: “The Israelis are not going to strike Qatar directly, because it would be completely unacceptable to the Americans. Qatar plays both sides: there is a US airbase in Qatar and a UK Qatari joint Royal Air Force Squadron [Qatar also hosts Hamas leadership].”

The US has not officially responded to the strike, but it’s likely they knew before the weapon was directed into Iranian airspace.

“The Americans have liaison officers embedded all over the IDF. They were aware of the Yemen strike and facilitated it, so I would be very surprised if they weren’t aware this time,” said Fox.

Nusbacher said the Israelis “would certainly have signalled what options they were considering [to America], and given them courtesy warning”, but she adds, “The Israelis would never be so foolish as to ask for permission, it is always easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.”

While the killing of Haniyeh is undoubtedly an escalation, neither Nusbacher nor Fox believe the strike will draw the US into a wider conflict.

“It was deliberately below the threshold of requiring US involvement,” said Fox.

Nusbacher argued: “The Israelis are already getting everything they need from the Americans, they don’t need direct American involvement, especially because it would take the conflict out of their control.”

Escalation in the Middle East usually puts the global diaspora at greater risk. Fox said threats to global Jewry are already so bad, “I don’t see it getting worse,” Nusbacher, however, said the attack puts “Jews globally are at a greater risk.”

“The Iranians have vowed vengeance and retribution for this attack, and we know the Iranians are willing to target not only Israelis but Jews globally... so they will go for soft targets. Israelis and Jews globally are soft targets,” she said.

However, this would take time to coordinate. While Nusbacher did not rule out fanatical lone wolf attackers, she said: “From an Iranian point of view it may be months or years before a response comes – when the Iranians vow revenge they don’t just grab a gun and try to shoot someone, they are professional, thoughtful, and crafty.”