There seems to be little hope for conflict engagement strategies in one of the world’s most dangerous and challenging hotspot.
Momina Khan
The devastating impact of the Israeli attack which targeted Hamas’s political leadership in Doha was felt all across the Middle East. By doing so Israel definitely set a dangerous precedent, creating doubts about the safety and security of the region as a whole alongside undermining sovereignty of a nation.
There is an overwhelming sense of anger coupled with disbelief within Qatar and even across the entire Middle East. Being a close US ally and hosting the Hamas leadership at the same time, Qatar is uniquely placed to play the role of a mediator, between Israel and Hamas and on the day of the attack Hamas’s negotiating team was in a meeting to discuss the latest US proposal regarding ceasefire. However after the Israeli strike, the spillover of the Gaza’s war into a wider region is clearly visible, spreading further bloodshed and instability.
Meanwhile, Qatar has hosted a summit of Arab and Islamic leadership to discuss a formal response and in a fiery speech, Qatar’s Emir described the attack as “blatant, treacherous and cowardly.”
On Sunday Qatar’s prime minister urged the international community to reject “double standards” and demand accountability from Israel. At a preparatory meeting on the eve of the emergency summit, the premier Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani said: “The time has come for the international community to stop using double standards and to punish Israel for all crimes it has committed, and Israel needs to know that the ongoing war of extermination that our brotherly Palestinian people is being subjected to, and whose aim is to expel them from their land, will not work.”
The Monday’s emergency summit in Doha which was expected to yield concrete measures fell short of agreeing on any coordinated action by the leadership primarily because of the visible differences among the nations alongside having limited options.
Under international law, State self defence is considered the state’s inherent right where it can use force to repel an armed attack and a failure to do so could embolden external threats. According to a BBC report, “Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu has not ruled out further strikes on Hamas leaders following last week’s attack in Qatar, saying they would not have immunity “wherever they are”. Despite being a key non-NATO ally of Washington and hosting Al Udeid, the largest US airbase in the Middle East, Qatar could not prevent the audacious attack by Israel.
This attack points towards America’s diminishing role in the region, thereby sending a caution signal to the rest of the Middle Eastern governments relying heavily on the United States. The Israeli oppression may also act as a driving force, leading the Arab states to consider either enhancing their own military capabilities or urging Beijing to play a greater role in the Middle East’s security affairs. In a major geopolitical development, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have signed a “Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement”.
This pact has been unveiled few days after the aggressive Israeli attack which shook the Gulf States trust in the US with respect to their security matters.
The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC)’s pledge to “activate a joint defence mechanism” might bring forward multiple other joint ventures in days to come.
By bombing the Hamas leadership in Doha, Israel clearly acted as a disruptor, creating obstacles for the mediators involved in the peace process and at the same time seems uninterested in implementing conflict calming measures. This insincerity towards dialogue creates a visible lack of trust and an unproductive atmosphere eventually leading to a further escalation of the conflict. The Prime Minister of Qatar worded his concerns by stating that the aggression “was not merely an attack on a location, but an assault on the very principle of mediation itself, and on diplomacy as an alternative to war and destruction.”
Although Qatar initiated the mediation process and brought both warring parties to the negotiating table, but the current bleak scenario, where sincerity is compromised, there seems to be little hope for conflict engagement strategies in one of the world’s most dangerous and challenging hotspot.
Read: Diplomatic Wisdom in Treaty of Hudaybiyyah
______________
The writer is a freelance journalist focusing on politics, international relations and tourism.
