Union Minister Nitin Gadkari has described an encounter he says took place just hours before the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, recounting how a chance meeting preceded one of the Middle East’s most closely watched killings. Speaking at a book launch, Gadkari said he had come into close proximity with Haniyeh shortly before the Hamas political chief was killed inside a tightly guarded military complex in Tehran.According to Gadkari’s account, the meeting occurred during a visit that brought together political figures and intermediaries from different regions, with security arrangements reflecting Tehran’s heightened alert levels at the time. Gadkari told the audience that the encounter struck him as routine then, but acquired gravity only after news emerged of Haniyeh’s death later the same day. He did not claim any foreknowledge of the attack and stressed that the meeting was incidental, framed by protocol-driven movements rather than a planned engagement.
Haniyeh, a central figure in Hamas politics, was killed in Tehran in a strike that sent shockwaves across West Asia. The killing took place within a compound associated with military and security functions, intensifying scrutiny over how such an operation could be carried out in one of the most protected zones of the Iranian capital. Officials in Iran acknowledged the breach while promising investigations, as regional actors weighed the implications for an already volatile security landscape.
Gadkari’s remarks have drawn attention because they add a personal dimension to an event that has largely been analysed through the prism of geopolitics and intelligence operations. His account places an international political figure near the scene within a narrow timeframe, underscoring how diplomatic and political circuits can intersect with high-stakes security theatres. The minister did not disclose the precise venue of the meeting or the nature of any exchange, saying only that it was brief and conducted in the presence of others.
The assassination itself marked a significant escalation in the shadow conflict involving Israel and Iran, with Hamas leaders historically moving between capitals under varying degrees of protection. Haniyeh had been based outside Gaza for extended periods, operating from Doha and travelling frequently for political outreach. His presence in Tehran reflected Hamas’s ties with Iran, which has provided backing to groups opposed to Israel, while maintaining a careful balance in regional diplomacy.
Security analysts have noted that the killing raised questions about intelligence penetration and the effectiveness of counter-espionage measures in Iran. The choice of location suggested a deliberate message, demonstrating reach and signalling that senior figures were not beyond the operational scope of adversaries. Iranian authorities responded with tightened security protocols, arrests linked to suspected leaks, and vows of retaliation, though official details remained closely held.
Within political circles, Gadkari’s recollection has prompted debate over the risks faced by visiting delegations and the unpredictability of security environments in conflict-adjacent capitals. Diplomats familiar with such travel say itineraries often overlap in venues such as hotels, conference halls, or secure compounds, making incidental encounters possible even amid stringent controls. The minister’s description aligns with this pattern, portraying the meeting as a by-product of tightly choreographed schedules rather than a substantive interaction.