Lessons from the Doha Strike: Israel and the Boundaries of Sovereignty

posted on: Sep 17, 2025

By: Laila Mamdouh / Arab America Contributing Writer

On September 9, 2025, the Middle East woke up to an unprecedented escalation. Israel launched an airstrike in Doha, Qatar, targeting senior Hamas officials meeting under Qatari mediation. The strike hit a residential complex in the upscale Leqtaifiya district, near a petrol station, killing several people and injuring others, including civilians. Although Israel insisted it was pursuing “terrorist leaders directly responsible for attacks on Israelis,” the bombing was more than a tactical strike, it was a direct attack on the sovereignty of a Gulf state.

Qatar reacted swiftly, condemning the strike as “a flagrant violation of international law and a breach of Qatar’s sovereignty.” Its Ministry of Foreign Affairs called the act “state terrorism.” The timing made the attack even more provocative: Hamas representatives had been in Doha to discuss a potential ceasefire in Gaza, with Qatar serving as host and the United States as mediator. As one Qatari diplomat told Al Jazeera, “This was not just an attack on Hamas; it was an attack on Qatar’s role as a mediator.”  

Diplomacy in Crisis

The strike set off immediate diplomatic fallout. Qatar convened an emergency summit of Arab and Islamic states, drawing leaders from across the Gulf Cooperation Council and beyond. In their joint statement, they condemned Israel’s strike and pledged to “activate a joint defense mechanism” to protect against future violations. Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister went further, calling the attack “an assault on the collective security of the Gulf.”

Meanwhile, the United States scrambled to contain the damage. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met first with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, then traveled to Doha to reassure Qatari leaders. Reports soon emerged that Washington and Doha were finalizing a new defense cooperation agreement, one described by Reuters as “expedited in light of Qatar’s new vulnerability.” Still, many noted the careful balance in Washington’s language: while the U.S. emphasized support for Qatar’s sovereignty, it stopped short of condemning Israel outright.

Israel, far from backing down, doubled down. Netanyahu declared, “Hamas leaders will not find sanctuary anywhere. We will pursue them wherever they are.” That defiance has left many in the region questioning whether Israel now sees itself as above the norms of sovereignty.

The Oil Question

For many observers, the most immediate question is why Arab states have not responded with oil sanctions, their traditional tool of leverage. The answer lies not in reluctance but in structural constraints. Oil no longer wields the power it did in the 1970s.

Gulf states are heavily dependent on oil revenue to finance social programs, infrastructure, and political stability. To slash exports would mean slashing their own budgets. Moreover, the global oil market is more diversified than ever. Producers outside the Middle East, including the United States and Brazil, can quickly offset disruptions, blunting the effect of any embargo.

There are also diplomatic and political costs. Most Gulf states rely on deep security and trade relationships with the U.S. and Europe. An oil embargo would put those ties at risk at precisely the moment when many countries, such as Saudi Arabia under Vision 2030, are pursuing economic diversification. International trade norms and investment treaties create additional barriers, raising the prospect of legal retaliation or reputational damage. 

Even more telling is the shifting energy landscape itself. With global attention on renewables and decarbonization, oil’s role as a coercive weapon has diminished. As an analyst in the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs noted recently, “The geopolitical power of oil is declining, and the costs of weaponizing it are higher than ever.” For this reason, the real question is not why Arab states are refusing to use oil, but why they cannot.

A Crisis of Trust

Beyond economics, the strike has cast deep doubt on the credibility of U.S. alliances in the Middle East. Qatar is home to Al Udeid Air Base, the largest American military installation in the region. If a U.S. ally so closely tied to Washington can be attacked with apparent impunity, what security guarantees remain for others?

As one Gulf analyst told The Guardian, “The United States cannot have it both ways. It cannot promise us security while letting Israel bomb us without consequence.” While the new defense pact between Washington and Doha is a gesture of reassurance, it may not erase the perception that American guarantees have limits when it comes to restraining Israel. For states that normalized ties with Israel through the Abraham Accords, the episode is a sobering reminder that alliances are fragile.

Rogue State Behavior?

Perhaps the most alarming question raised by Israel’s strike is whether the country is beginning to act like a rogue state. By definition, rogue states are those that flout international norms, disregard sovereignty, and act unilaterally without accountability. Israel’s decision to bomb a sovereign Gulf country far from the battlefields of Gaza, and at a moment of delicate negotiations, fits uncomfortably close to that description.

Turkey’s foreign ministry was blunt, warning that “if Israel can bomb Doha today without consequence, what stops it from striking Beirut, Amman, or even Ankara tomorrow?” The fear is not only about this strike but about precedent. If Israel continues to pursue Hamas officials abroad without restraint, the erosion of sovereignty norms could destabilize the entire region.

What Next for the Middle East?

The path ahead is uncertain. Some fear further escalation, with Israel potentially targeting Hamas leaders in other Arab capitals. Each strike would deepen the crisis and force governments into tougher positions. At the same time, Gulf states are already moving toward strengthened defense ties with the U.S., particularly in missile defense and intelligence sharing. Qatar’s expedited pact is likely just the first of many such measures.

Diplomatic pushback is also expected. Arab and Islamic states may escalate their efforts through the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, or by pursuing targeted sanctions against Israeli officials. Yet the broader regional picture is one of polarization. Some states may move closer to Israel and the U.S. for security assurances, while others align more firmly with resistance movements, deepening divides within the Arab world itself.

Where Does It End?

Israel’s bombing of Qatar is more than a single event; it is a moment that has forced the region to confront its vulnerabilities. It has revealed the limits of oil as a tool of leverage, exposed the fragility of U.S. security commitments, and pushed Israel closer to the image of a state acting outside accepted norms.

The larger question is not only what happens next but where this ends. If unchecked, today’s strike could mark the beginning of a dangerous new era in Middle Eastern politics; one in which sovereignty is fragile, alliances are uncertain, and conflict spirals without clear limits.

For Qatar, for its Gulf neighbors, and for the broader Arab world, the bombing of Doha is a reminder that the question is no longer simply about who Israel will strike. The real question is how long the region can endure such violations before decisive action is forced upon it.

Want more articles like this? Sign up for our e-newsletter!

Check out our blog here!