Why Is Qatar Threatening to Withdraw Its Mediation Between Hamas and 'Israel'?

In a recent development, Qatar has announced a reassessment of its mediation role in the protracted conflict between Hamas and the Israeli Occupation.

This move comes after months of facilitating ceasefire and prisoner exchange negotiations, which have been marked by significant disagreements and slow progress.

Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani, Qatar's Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, expressed concerns over the misuse of Qatari mediation for narrow political interests, necessitating a comprehensive review.

Public Calls

During a press conference in Doha, following discussions with Turkish intelligence chief Hakan Fidan, Al Thani emphasized the limitations of Qatar's role, stating that mediators cannot offer solutions that the conflicting parties are unwilling to consider themselves.

He assured that Qatar remains committed to its mediation efforts but will make decisions based on the outcome of the current evaluation.

The reassessment was prompted, in part, by criticism from U.S. politicians, including Congressman Steny Hoyer, who questioned Qatar's effectiveness in pressuring Hamas leaders and suggested a reevaluation of U.S.–Qatar relations.

Hoyer's statements, perceived as biased toward the Israeli Occupation, drew criticism from various quarters, including former diplomat William Grant, who pointed out the misleading nature of pressuring Qatar, given that Iran and Syria hold more sway over Hamas.

The Qatari embassy in the United States responded to the criticisms by underscoring its role as a mediator, not a controller of either the Israeli Occupation or Hamas.

The embassy highlighted the slow pace of recent progress and the unconstructiveness of blame and threats.

It also reminded that Qatar's involvement in mediation was at the behest of the United States, given the direct communication impasse between the Israeli Occupation and Hamas.

The debate over Qatar's mediation role has also reached the Senate, where Senators Ted Budd and Joni Ernst, along with other members of the Foreign Relations Committee, have called for Qatar to intensify its efforts to secure the release of hostages held by Hamas.

They questioned the rationale behind Qatar's continued hosting of Hamas' political office if reasonable negotiations are refused.

In response to accusations of harboring terrorists, Qatari Ambassador Sheikh Meshal bin Hamad Al Thani clarified that Qatar's engagement with Hamas was established to maintain open lines of communication at the request of the United States. Despite the challenges, Qatar remains focused on the negotiation process, aiming for the safe release of hostages.

The ongoing discourse reflects the complexities of international diplomacy and the delicate balance that mediators like Qatar must maintain in facilitating dialogue and resolution between parties entrenched in longstanding conflict.

Draft Resolution

In a bold move that has reverberated through diplomatic circles, Republican Senator Ted Budd recently introduced a draft resolution aimed at reconsidering Qatar's classification as a major non-NATO ally.

While the resolution is not yet law, it underscores growing concerns within Congress about Qatar's role in hosting Hamas and its failure to take decisive action against the group.

Senator Budd emphasized that this resolution was not proposed lightly. Rather, it reflects the current state of affairs and the warnings issued by fellow lawmakers. 

The status of a major non-NATO ally, he argued, is a privilege that must be continually earned. By failing to address the Hamas issue, Qatar risks being perceived as tacitly supporting a U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organization — an untenable position for a key ally.

The Qatari Embassy in Washington swiftly responded, expressing disappointment at the resolution. In a statement, the embassy highlighted that the bilateral relationship extends beyond defense matters.

Qatar has quietly and effectively mediated the release of Americans in conflict zones such as Afghanistan, Iran, and Venezuela.

This track record of successful cooperation, built on shared interests and commitment, should not be underestimated.

The embassy further emphasized Qatar's mediation role in conflicts between "Israel" and Hamas since 2006. In the ongoing crisis, Qatar's efforts have led to the release of 100 hostages.

However, the embassy clarified that Qatar acts solely as a mediator and does not control either Hamas or "Israel." Ultimately, the responsibility for reaching an agreement lies with the conflicting parties themselves.

Behind the scenes, another dimension emerges. Jonathan Hutson, a researcher at the Sentinel Conflict Monitoring Project, suggests that recent moves against Qatar are orchestrated by the Israeli lobby in the United States.

The lobby aims to influence the Biden administration to take a tougher stance toward Qatar.

While Senator Budd's resolution faces challenges in a Senate where Qatar's democratic allies hold sway, the role of lobbying organizations cannot be ignored.

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), in particular, wields significant influence over members of Congress.

Even prominent Democrats, like House Minority Leader Rep. Steny Hamilton Hoyer, find themselves navigating the delicate balance between national security interests and longstanding alliances.

As tensions persist, the fate of Qatar's major ally status remains uncertain, caught in the crosscurrents of geopolitics and lobbying efforts.

AIPAC Lobbying

In a recent twist of geopolitical maneuvering, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has been implicated in lobbying efforts to shutter the University of Texas at Qatar.

The decision to close the university's branch in Qatar, founded in 2003, has raised eyebrows and sparked heated debates.

Hutson, a prominent commentator, contends that the pressure exerted by AIPAC played a pivotal role in the university's fate.

The Board of Regents of the parent institution in Texas, voting by a majority, terminated the Qatar branch contract, citing "escalating instability in the Middle East" as their rationale. However, critics argue that these justifications lack coherence and transparency.

The Qatari Prime Minister's recent statements hint at simmering tensions. Doha, he asserts, is currently evaluating its mediation role. This evaluation comes in response to perceived pressure from the United States, which seemingly expects Qatar to align unequivocally with its pro-"Israel" stance, sidelining the plight of the Palestinian people.

Netanyahu's maneuvers aim to extract concessions from Hamas, especially after his military plans faltered.

Whether it's consolidating his position or prolonging his presidency, the stakes are high. Meanwhile, detractors harbor resentment toward Qatar's successful mediation track record.

Despite threats and criticism, Doha remains a tenacious player. Analysts argue that Qatar, with its unique blend of relations — both with Hamas and the United States — holds the key to successful negotiations.

Notably, Qatar hosts Hamas's political office while also housing a robust 10,000-strong U.S. military base.

Anna Jacobs, a senior Gulf analyst, predicts that Qatar will persist in its mediation efforts despite the political headwinds.

"They will try to help, try to mediate, as long as they can," she asserts, acknowledging the delicate balancing act Qatar faces.