Israel’s Doha strike – a failure or a qualified success?

Israel’s bomb attack on the Hamas headquarters in Doha last Tuesday, 9 September, has had all the experts furiously debating whether this dramatic action was a success or a failure. Let’s analyse the advantages and disadvantages of this unexpected move.

First, even assuming none of the senior members of the Hamas leadership were actually eliminated by the strike, which now seems likely, there’s no doubt that the attack will now focus the minds of this leadership. Far from being safe in their sanctuary in Doha and watching events securely from the sidelines, they now know they are still at risk of being attacked. This, Israeli officials will argue, must increase the pressure on them to become less intransigent and agree to a reasonable deal that Israel can live with, that can at last end this war in Gaza. In addition, this strike will presumably also ratchet up the pressure on Qatar, to impose itself more forcibly on the Hamas leadership it still hosts, and fairly lavishly at that, to get them to agree to a reasonable deal to end this war.

Second is the deterrence factor. With Jerusalem having suffered its biggest terror attack in years the day before, with six people murdered and more than 20 injured, and with Hamas taking responsibility, Israel no doubt felt compelled to respond. With the new Israel after 7 October far more vigorous in its responses to attacks like these, this dramatic action was no doubt meant to send a clear and direct message to the leadership of Hamas that such attacks will meet with strong retribution. As The Economist sardonically noted, with this attack, Israel has now bombed six countries in the Middle East-Lebanon, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, and now Qatar. However, there’s no doubt that Israel, now the regional superpower, is sending a clear message to the rest of the region about its strength, ability, and willingness to use it.

Disadvantages

First, there’s no guarantee that this dramatic escalation will force both Hamas and Qatar into a more accommodating negotiating position. Hamas might simply end the negotiations totally, and, even worse, do serious harm to the remaining living hostages. There’s no doubt that this action puts the lives of the hostages at risk.

With respect to Qatar, this could make it reconsider its role in its entirety. With all its duplicity, funding Hamas and Al Jazeera on one side while still being a staunch ally of the United States and an indispensable mediator between Israel and Hamas on the other, Qatar remains crucial in any attempt to negotiate a deal to end this war. It’s the only “address” to contact the Hamas leadership at, and without its leverage, there’s little chance of Hamas agreeing to anything. If Qatar does withdraw, any talks and negotiations to end the war could grind to an absolute halt, with dramatic consequences for the hostages and many other lives in the region.

Although many in Israel argue that Egypt could pick up the baton, and that it’s a more transparent broker, it’s not clear that it has the same amount of leverage over Hamas as Qatar does seeing as it doesn’t host or fund the leadership.

Second, although this strike by Israel was no doubt meant to send a message of strength to the rest of the region, this might actually have a different effect. It could cause the Gulf states to start wondering if the Israeli leadership isn’t starting to become irrational and over aggressive, and cause the Abraham Accords to teeter. It might also lead to those not already in the Accords to reconsider any thoughts of joining with the current leadership in charge.

Finally, there’s the US. There’s no doubt that this strike on a major US ally, which the US must have known about beforehand – the US base in Qatar is the biggest in the region, and its “eyes” spot any movement of planes long before they reach their destination – has embarrassed Trump. He has been shown as unwilling to protect his major ally, and has been publicly unhappy about the Israeli actions. This could lead to the US both distancing itself from Israel and losing interest in a deal to end the Gaza war. Israel needs the US to use its diplomatic clout to push Hamas and Qatar over the line in agreeing to a deal that Israel can live with, and without the US, any deal is extremely unlikely.

Conclusion

There’s no doubt the bombing by Israel of the Hamas headquarters is a major risk. It could force Hamas into a more reasonable negotiating position, and project a position of Israeli strength in the region. On the other hand, it could lead to negotiations collapsing, with the US and Qatar both withdrawing. Although that extreme scenario of total collapse of negotiations is most unlikely, only time will tell if the bombing will be come to be seen as a daring negotiating strategy that helped to end the war in Gaza or a rash gamble that extended it.

• Baruch the Balanced is an attorney who can’t be named for professional reasons, but who studied politics and international relations at university.