Israel Strikes Hamas in Qatar

Critical Questions by Mona Yacoubian and Will Todman

Published September 9, 2025

On September 9, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) announced that the Israeli Air Force conducted an assassination attempt against Hamas leaders in Doha. Hamas negotiators had reportedly gathered to discuss their response to the Trump administration's latest ceasefire proposal for Gaza. In a statement, Hamas officials said that its leadership team survived. The attack follows a string of Israeli strikes on Middle Eastern capitals in recent months, including Tehran, Beirut, Damascus, and Sana'a.

Q1: Why did Israel strike Doha now?

A1: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that the strike in Doha was retaliation for a shooting in Jerusalem on September 8. Hamas claimed responsibility for the attack, which killed six Israelis and wounded others. However, Israel had signaled its intent to escalate against Hamas prior to the shooting. Last week, the IDF chief of staff said, "We are operating across the entire Middle East . . . Hamas will have no place to hide from us."

The Israeli government is prioritizing Hamas' total defeat over a ceasefire agreement. The Trump administration had made a renewed push for a ceasefire in Gaza in recent days, and the Hamas negotiating team was reportedly meeting in Doha to discuss its response when Israel struck. Israel's attack has likely ended those talks.

The Israeli government is now escalating its efforts to force Hamas to surrender, despite mounting international criticism. The UN General Assembly will meet next week in New York, where several Israeli allies are expected to recognize an independent Palestinian state. Undeterred, Israel has begun its operations to seize Gaza City in a major ground assault. The Doha strike is another element of this campaign to force Hamas' capitulation and indicates that the Israeli government feels able to withstand international pressure.

Q2: How did Qatar react? What about other countries in the region? And what does this mean for mediation efforts in the Middle East?

A2: The Qatari government has strongly condemned the attack as a "criminal assault" and a "blatant violation of all international laws and norms." Several regional governments also criticized the Israeli strike, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Lebanon. Syria-which previously refrained from criticizing Israel when it struck Iran on June 13-also joined the chorus of condemnation.

Significantly, Doha has announced that it is suspending its mediation efforts between Israel and Hamas in response to the Israeli attack. Unlike its earlier suspension in November 2024, which arose out of the negotiating parties' intransigence, Qatar's current decision is rooted in far more serious concerns regarding its own security and risk tolerance-both severely tested by Israel's bold daytime attack. Qatar announced that a member of its Internal Security Forces was killed in the strike. As such, Qatar is unlikely to resume its role under the current circumstances, significantly dimming the prospects for a ceasefire in Gaza and the return of the remaining Israeli hostages.

Indeed, the Israeli strike could mark the end of Qatar's years-long intercession with Hamas on behalf of both the U.S. and Israeli governments. Both the United States and Israel previously supported Qatar's role in mediating the conflict and had made specific requests to Doha for its support. Qatari officials say the United States had asked Qatar to host a Hamas delegation as part of its mediation effort. Meanwhile, Israel had also approved the transfer of millions of dollars from Qatar to Hamas.

More broadly, Gulf states have played a prominent role in mediating both regional and international conflicts. Oman has hosted U.S.-Iran talks on multiple occasions during both the Biden and Obama administrations and most recently during the second Trump administration. Those talks were about to enter a sixth round when Israel struck Iran on June 13, and Iran subsequently pulled out of the negotiations.

Gulf diplomats have mediated conflicts beyond the Middle East as well. For its part, Qatar has engaged in as many as ten different mediations in wide-ranging conflicts from the Congo to Venezuela. Saudi Arabia has also engaged as a mediator, hosting high-level talks and facilitating prisoner exchanges related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Riyadh has also brokered peace talks between warring factions in Sudan. Gulf mediators are likely to continue these efforts as they enhance their influence globally; however, they may well question the value of interceding on behalf of the United States in instances when they feel their own security will be threatened by their mediation efforts.

Q3: What does the attack mean for the Trump administration's Middle East strategy?

A3: The attack undermines U.S. credibility as a guarantor of peace and stability with its allies and partners in the Gulf. Gulf states will likely doubt the United States' ability or willingness to restrain Israel and whether hosting U.S. forces really guarantees U.S. protection from external attacks. More broadly, the attack also impairs U.S. efforts to encourage other Middle Eastern states to normalize relations with Israel. The White House appears to recognize these risks and seeks to distance itself from Israel's attack, saying "unilaterally bombing inside Qatar . . . does not advance Israel or America's goals."

However, the White House stated that this attack could serve as "an opportunity for peace." That belief seems to stem from the idea that Hamas leaders will feel more vulnerable than ever, inducing them to capitulate. However, regional and international condemnation of Israel's actions may bolster Hamas's standing and make it less willing to compromise. Unless the Trump administration changes course and decides to exert significant pressure on Israel, its ability to secure a Gaza ceasefire will now be much diminished.

Q4: What are the broader implications for the regional order in the Middle East?

A4: Israel's strike on Doha is unprecedented and marks a dramatic escalation in regional tensions. It comes as part of a broader trend of Israel's deepening military interventions across the region, which include strikes on various capitals, including Beirut, Damascus, and now Doha. It also follows Israel's initiation of a 12-day conflict with Iran in June. The attack will deepen regional and international concerns over Israel's lack of restraint and its transgression of international laws and norms in a Middle East that increasingly appears to lack guardrails or respected rules of engagement.

While the Abraham Accords normalizing ties between some Gulf states and Israel are likely to remain in place, Gulf countries view Israel's provocative role as a direct threat to their aspirations to de-escalate regional conflicts and focus on diversifying their economies. This mounting concern is in turn pushing Gulf countries closer together in their opposition to Israel. Anwar Gargash, a prominent advisor to the Emirati president, noted "the security of the Arab Gulf states is indivisible," terming Israel's actions "treacherous."

More broadly, Israel's strike comes against the backdrop of a "hinge moment" in the region where the old order is vanishing and a new, region-driven order is emerging. Regional actors hold far greater agency to shape the region's contours. The September 9 strike embodies clashing approaches to shaping the emerging order. Israel-the region's dominant military power-has largely relied on military intervention to neutralize threats and "change the Middle East." By contrast, the Gulf-the region's new "center of gravity"-has focused on mediation and de-escalating conflicts to stabilize the region and focus on economic growth.

Mona Yacoubian is senior adviser and director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. Will Todman is the chief of staff of the Geopolitics and Foreign Policy Department and a senior fellow in the Middle East Program at CSIS.

Programs & Projects