By Dr Maisa Al Masri
“This is a message to the entire Middle East,” Israeli Knesset Speaker Amir Ohana said after the Israeli airstrike that targeted Hamas leaders in the heart of Qatar’s capital, Doha.
Ohana’s statement is more than a reaction to a military operation—it is a declared strategic message, signaling to the region, and primarily the Gulf, that Israel, partnered with Washington, now controls the decision-making process in the Middle East.
His remarks are an explicit and direct threat, reflective of the new deterrence doctrine adopted by Tel Aviv: no red lines, no geographic immunity, and no Western allies beyond Israeli dictates. In simple terms, anyone who disagrees with Israel becomes a legitimate target—even in the heart of a friendly capital that hosts the largest American military base.
This leads to a dangerous conclusion: Israel no longer sees the Gulf states as partners in stability but, rather, as “open arenas for fiery messages.” Washington is not only silent but complicit, mocking the Arabs.
Naked Dominance
The Israeli attack in the Gulf marks the beginning of a new era of naked dominance. This was not a traditional security operation, but a pivotal turning point in the rules of regional engagement—one that publicly embarrassed Qatar both on the Arab stage and internationally.
Israel has now placed itself in a new circle—no longer concealing its intentions—where bombing and military strikes erase distinctions between political geography and the theater of operations. More dangerously, the heart of the Gulf is exposed to Tel Aviv’s fire. Who can challenge it?
The strike was not an intelligence leak or a covert operation, but a direct airstrike in an area teeming with embassies, schools, and residential neighborhoods, in a country that is both a major Washington ally and a pillar of American security in the Middle East.
The message is clear: No one is above attack—no state, no sovereignty, no partnership.
The US administration, led by Donald Trump, issued a series of conflicting statements regarding its prior knowledge of the operation. Whether it knew and supported it, knew and remained silent, knew too late, or did not know at all, the outcome remains the same: American cover withdrawn, Gulf confidence eroded, billions lost. The US Embassy in Doha merely urged caution for American citizens, while the White House oscillated between “regret over the location” and “understanding the goal of eliminating terrorism.”
Contrary to appearances, Gulf capitals received the opposite message: Your security is not a priority, and your sovereignty does not guarantee a clear position from Washington. The key questions now: Why Qatar? Why now? Why strike Qatar and not Turkey, or Iran? The Hamas leaders were fresh from Istanbul, suggesting Tel Aviv’s choice of target was far from arbitrary.
Tel Aviv did not strike Istanbul, despite the leaders’ recent presence, indicating a deep political calculation. Turkey, with its military, political, and international complexity, is no playground for Israeli aggression; there are red lines even Tel Aviv won’t cross. The risk of Turkish military response, internal upheaval during an election season, and delicate NATO dynamics rendered Turkey “operationally closed” even to Israel’s most radical decision-makers. But when the targets left Istanbul for Doha, the calculus shifted.
Qatar and Arab Grey Zones
In Israeli security minds, Qatar—like other threatened Arab states—is merely an intermediate grey area: not neutral, not quite an enemy, a potentially shocking target at low cost. Arab decision-makers must recognize this.
From Tel Aviv’s perspective, Qatar is juggling contradictory roles, managing mediation, funding aid, and hosting parties that anger Israel—without any real deterrent umbrella. No international consideration could prevent a surgical strike executed within hours. Simply hosting an American base does not immunize Doha; indeed, it may even tempt Tel Aviv, proving that regional decision-making is no longer Washington’s alone but Tel Aviv’s as well.
Israel needed a platform to deliver its biggest message since the Gaza war. In the silence of its strongest ally, it chose the weakest link.
Let’s pause on Ohana’s statement: “a message to the Middle East.” This is no slip of the tongue but a strategic doctrine for future decisions. Israel is telling every country in the region: whoever harbors Hamas, or even engages in dialogue, could be next.
If the Arab states fail to take a firm political stand, the Doha precedent will echo elsewhere. It may not be Hamas mediation at issue, but the concepts of neutrality, balance, and dialogue with parties disapproved of by Tel Aviv, which could become sufficient cause for attack—a punishment policy.
Existential Questions for Arab Capitals
This moment poses existential questions: If Qatar—Washington’s closest Gulf partner—is bombed in broad daylight, after Syria, Lebanon, and Gaza, should other capitals await their turn? Iraq? Riyadh? Abu Dhabi? Kuwait? Does the American umbrella truly protect, or only when interests align with Israel?
What is the point of hosting American bases if they do not prevent airspace violations?
The Doha event pushes the region to a crossroads: continue the status quo of dependency and mediation, attempt the unlikely feat of building independent air defenses, or seek alternative alliances (Ankara, Beijing, Moscow, Tehran?) and establish red lines Tel Aviv cannot cross.
Now Qatar faces difficult choices: Will it withdraw from Hamas mediation? Demand real security guarantees? Move toward symbolic deterrence or unconventional partnerships? Or pay the price of protection yet again?
Beware: A war of wills has begun. The Israeli airstrike in Doha was not just a blow to Hamas but a direct attack on Gulf sovereignty and regional prestige, undermining international law and the alleged strategic partnership with America.
This is the dawn of a new era, where Israel and Washington declare that regional security is no longer an Arab decision. The question remains: Will the Arabs awaken before Ohana’s message reaches other capitals?
Perhaps.
Dr Maisa Al Masri is a political writer based in Amman, Jordan.
11 September 2025
Source: countercurrents.org