As I see it, we are now in a state of war with Palestinian terrorist organizations and to a certain extent with the Palestinian Authority, and it is considered justifiable to hit the military personnel of your enemy in such circumstances. The more difficult question, however, is the effectiveness of assassinations given the various costs and the prospect of retaliation. The assassination of then Hizbullah leader Sheikh Abbas Musawi in February 1992 led to a wave of retaliatory Katyusha rocket attacks on the Galilee and, in the minds of many experts, the bombing a month later of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires. Scores of innocent people were killed and hundreds wounded in these revenge attacks. The price of an assassination policy, however, is not solely confined to the size and scale of the potential retaliation.
Proponents also have to take into account other factors.
The worst-case scenario, Ganor said, is if the assassination attempt fails, as in the case of Hamas official Khaled Mashaal. When considering the likelihood of enemy retaliation, he added, the main factors to be taken into account are the levels of motivation and capability. The will to attack might be increased by an assassination, but the organization in question might not have the means to implement its desire for revenge. In general I would say that when assassinations are carried out in the right quantity against specific military targets which are responsible for attacks against Israel, the benefits outweigh the costs. One Jerusalem Sign the petition to keep Jerusalem united.