There is debate among experts as to the rationality inherent in Yahya Sinwar’s decision-making. While most experts believe that Sinwar is an irrational psychopath, other experts argue that he is a psychopath who ultimately makes rational decisions.
Computer analysis conducted at Reichmann University’s Computer Decision Laboratory using HUDDLEAI software, which combines artificial intelligence (AI) with a proprietary method for identifying decision patterns, showed that Sinwar’s decisions were rational. It turns out that there is and advances goals and objectives. Leader of the terrorist organization Hamas.
This conclusion is not based on an Israeli or Western perspective, but rather on an assessment based on Hamas’s ideology and goals.
This research was conducted under my leadership as Director of the Computerized Decision Making Lab at Reichmann University and former president of the university. Research assistant Liam Sadowitz contributed to the study.
AI that understands Shinwar
A retrospective reconstruction of Shinwar’s 14 decisions was performed using AI software. This includes his decision on the 2021 ceasefire agreement with Israel after Operation Wall Keepers. The decision to abstain from participating in the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) following an Israeli Defense Force (IDF) operation to eliminate senior members of the group. The decision was made to launch a large-scale surprise attack on Israel on October 7th. The decision to agree to a temporary ceasefire in November 2023 in exchange for the release of some hostages. and the decision to extend the ceasefire as of exit on November 29, 2023.
The study found that 12 of the 14 decisions considered were on Mr. Sinwar’s side, given his stated goals of maintaining Hamas’ control, the survival of the Hamas leadership, and the release of Palestinian security prisoners. It turns out that the rationality of is irrefutable. Research shows that Mr. Sinwar rationally evaluates various options while considering these key criteria.
Hamas’s decision to carry out the invasion of Israel on October 7, 2023 was determined by Iran’s proxies (Hezbollah, pro-Iranian militias in Syria and Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen), and subsequent analysis suggests that on October 7 Although he may have underestimated the intensity of Israel’s reaction to the attack, Sinwar’s decision was shown to be rational.
Shinwar’s calculations for October 7th
In other words, the decision to invade on October 7th, along with Sinwar’s expectations that Hezbollah and other members of the Iranian axis would join forces with Hamas, reflect Sinwar’s calculations in light of key criteria for organizational decision-making. It turned out that they matched. In the fight against Israel.
Understanding how sinwars make decisions has a dramatic impact on predicting future decisions.
For example, a simulation conducted using this software at Reichmann University a few weeks ago showed that if Israel took a tougher stance on humanitarian aid or threatened to invade Rafah, Hamas would also take a similar stance toward hostages. It turned out that it would harden. , actually it was.
This is not an easy discovery.
Regardless of whether Shinwar is uncommunicative or not, the ability to recognize Shinwar’s decision-making patterns is critical to understanding and predicting Hamas’ decisions regarding the hostages and the progress of the war.The author is director of the Computerized Decision Lab at Reichmann University and author of 15 books on decision making and strategic analysis.
