Qatar joined the list of Israeli targets, with an unprecedented strike against the Hamas negotiating team in Doha. This move tests both Qatar’s central role in the Gaza ceasefire talks and US-Qatari relations.
On September 9, at least ten Israeli jets, armed with US made systems, flew more than 2,000 kilometres and launched ten long-range precision-guided missiles from outside Qatari airspace to reduce detection. Their target was the Hamas delegation in West Bay Lagoon in Leqtaifiya. Washington was reportedly informed only shortly before or during the attack, and Doha received word from the US about ten minutes after the bombing began.
Israel’s objectives appear clear. First, to undermine the US-backed ceasefire initiative under discussion in Doha at the time of the strike. Second, to send a message to regional states hosting Hamas leaders that they are not beyond Israel’s reach.
There was no imminent threat or intelligence necessity that justified this operation. Both Washington and Tel Aviv knew Hamas was reviewing the US proposal in Doha. This was a military strike with a political purpose.
When Netanyahu feared in July 2024 that the inauguration of President Masoud Pezeshkian might revive US-Iranian nuclear talks, Israel responded by assassinating Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyah in Tehran, just after a China-brokered unity deal between Fateh and Hamas. The Doha strike fits a similar pattern; Netanyahu signalling rejection of US reopening direct channels with Hamas without confronting the White House directly, even as Trump pressures him to bring the Gaza war to a close.
One casualty of this strike is Qatar’s relationship with both Israel and the US. Doha is likely to restrict information sharing with Tel Aviv, especially regarding Hamas leaders’ movements – already evident in its silence on the status and whereabouts of Hamas leader Khalil al-Hayya.
While Trump reassured Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani that such an attack would not happen again, there are no guarantees, particularly since Netanyahu faced only a symbolic rebuke. With two attacks from Iran and Israel within three months, this leaves Qatar at a strategic crossroads: it must weigh the benefits of its partnership with Washington against the risks of being dragged into regional shadow wars, and consider diversifying its security and diplomatic options.
The Wall Street Journal reported that that Trump had a heated exchange with Netanyahu, expressing frustration at Israeli prime minister’s unilateral moves. Yet, the US concern was less about targeting Hamas than about the location of the strike and the lack of prior notification. The White House noted that Trump “feels very badly” about the location of the Israeli strike in Doha. This underscores that Trump’s differences with Netanyahu are tactical, not strategic.
In effect, Trump is repeating the very dynamic he once criticised in Joe Biden: the appearance that US Presidents are either unwilling or unable to restrain Netanyahu.
Beyond the immediate fallout, Israel demonstrated its willingness to carry out high-risk operations deep inside the Gulf, in the capital of a US ally. Such actions blur the line between the Gaza conflict and the wider regional arena, raising fears of escalation and undermining the credibility of mediation diplomacy.
Qatar’s response will be crucial in shaping what comes next. For now, Doha has suspended its mediation role in Gaza until it gathers more information about the Israeli strike and convenes the emergency Arab-Islamic summit to decide on the proper response.
That pause allows Netanyahu to delay the ceasefire talks and continue the military operations in Gaza. If Doha and its regional partners cannot mount a meaningful response, Israel may feel emboldened to strike Hamas leaders in other countries, including Turkey or Egypt,
While the Arab-Islamic summit will discuss how to respond diplomatically to Israel, the real focus must be on Washington. Unless Arab states, especially in the Gulf, increase the political cost of Trump’s permissiveness, his calculations will not change. Pressure on Washington must include demands to immediately end the war in Gaza and to rein in Israel’s regional escalation.
Finally, the current mediation framework is not working. The US must play a more direct role in shaping a roadmap for a ceasefire that goes beyond the narrow questions of releasing Israeli hostages. Arab leaders, particularly in Doha and Riyadh, need more direct engagement with Trump to counterbalance Netanyahu’s narrative. A purely symbolic diplomatic response to Israel will be ineffective unless paired with clear pressure on Washington. The regional and international reaction must match the severity of the Israeli strike.
Joe Macaron is a researcher and analyst in international relations and geopolitics with over two decades of experience with high-profile international organisations. He holds a Ph.D. in Politics and International Studies from the University of Bath in the United Kingdom.
Follow Joe on X: @macaronjoe
Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com
Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.