Israel's understanding of the Qatari threat has gradually grown, reaching a level of maturity in public opinion. Moving to the next stage of translating this understanding into practical measures requires in-depth planning, a deeper understanding of the Qatari threat, and the formulation of appropriate methods for dealing with it.
Qatar is a hostile state. This recognition stems from a long series of initiatives and actions that Qatar has implemented, and continues to implement, against the State of Israel: from hosting the Hamas leadership on its territory, to the activities of Al Jazeera and other media outlets it directly or indirectly owns, including beIN Sports, Middle East Eye, AJ+, and Middle East Monitor, to its efforts to influence Western media by funding anti-Israel educational programs in Western universities and schools, providing assistance to organizations that call for boycotting Israel, supporting legal initiatives against it in the international arena, and promoting anti-Israel campaigns in cultural and artistic fields, such as the 2026 Venice Biennale. This is accompanied, according to various reports, by attempts to obstruct Israeli defense industry deals in Germany, efforts to influence US policy toward Iran, and activities that bolster organizations hostile to Israel, including Hamas and Hezbollah. Some publications have even alleged that the funding is not limited to Hamas, but also includes Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
Recognition itself is only the first step. In dealing with Qatar, the approach is just as important as the recognition itself. Given the widespread reach of Qatar's influence in the West, the Middle East, the Balkans, and Asia, slogans or strong statements are insufficient. Confrontation requires comprehensive and sustained work by experts capable of identifying interests, centers of influence, and sensitivities, and adapting the most effective tools to each arena. As a rule, these tools will not be military, but rather political, economic, geopolitical, legal, and media-related.
Multidimensional thinking is essential to effectively address the challenge posed by Qatar. For nearly three decades, Israeli governments have failed to properly assess Qatar's modus operandi and the depth of the challenge it represents.
A multi-dimensional approach is essential to effectively address the challenge posed by Qatar, not mere slogans. According to this approach, Israeli governments, for nearly three decades, have failed to properly assess Qatar's modus operandi and the depth of the challenge it represents. Israel has repeatedly prioritized short-term gains over its long-term interests, without fully grasping the strategic price it might pay in the future.
The Israeli political establishment's reversal of course following the designation of Qatar as a hostile state is welcome, but it risks being superficial. The proposed legislation failed to adequately address several secondary questions surrounding the definition of Qatar as a hostile state. These include the question of relying on Qatar for mediation, the stance on official intelligence and military cooperation between Qatar and Israel, which, according to public reports, continues, and the position on Qatari funds invested in other international entities, such as those invested in Jared Kushner's funds and those invested in Israel.
This last example also illustrates the geopolitical dimensions that any necessary definition of Qatar as a hostile state must address. It further highlights the perilous nature of Qatar's mediation approach, which has skillfully leveraged its own economic interests, both personal and public, as an integral part of the process. This underscores the challenge and necessitates a precise definition that acknowledges the risks involved rather than merely reducing them to a slogan.
The campaign rhetoric surrounding the possibility of designating Qatar as a hostile state may present an opportunity to formulate a more comprehensive strategic vision. The declaration itself is merely a starting point; it must be accompanied by a series of legislative, institutional, and planning steps that map out centers of influence, identify vulnerabilities and risks, and address the complexity posed by Qatar through a systematic, consistent, and long-term policy—not just through pronouncements.
A draft law on this matter should lead to the establishment of a research center dedicated to addressing the Qatari challenge from its various angles. When dealing with a centralized state like Qatar, it is impossible to continue with a piecemeal approach where each ministry and intelligence agency formulates its own position. The response to Qatar should be based on the integrated use of diverse tools, sometimes focusing on the economic instruments of the relevant bodies in Israel, sometimes on legal, media, and intelligence tools, and sometimes on diplomatic ones.
This does not mean that Israel will resort to military force or offensive threats. Measures should be cautious, some short-term and some long-term, bearing in mind that Qatar's position in Washington is stronger than ever. It seems the strategy should align with Qatar's successful approach.
Targeting specific companies whose names are linked to Qatar in the United States and Europe, based on the understanding that this step will be more effective than public propaganda campaigns against Qatar to tarnish its reputation.
On numerous occasions, Qatar has demonstrated its sensitivity to actions that appear minor compared to its considerable influence, such as a billboard in Times Square or a negative advertising campaign in The New York Times. Just as Qatar has used commercial interests as an integral part of its diplomatic relations, particularly in mediation, Israel could adopt a similar approach: targeting specific companies in the United States and Europe whose names are associated with Qatar. This would be far more effective than public smear campaigns against Qatar, which are futile and would only escalate tensions with Washington, a country concerned with Qatar's dignity. The optimal approach in the Qatari issue is to focus not on the head of the octopus, but on its smaller tentacles. Actions such as shutting down a university campus, thwarting a deal, or exposing a controversial conference have been highly significant and painful for Qatar, demonstrating how Israel can contain Qatar in a way that avoids escalating tensions with the United States. Successive US administrations have complained about anti-American publications in the Qatari press, as well as other acts of sabotage. Israel should exploit these instances to justify a similar strategy toward Qatar. As part of this justification, Israel could argue that such steps toward Qatar would help counterbalance Qatar's behavior toward the US administration in Washington. In this context, Israel should leverage the strong voices in American public opinion, as well as those close to the administration who are already warning of the Qatari threat.
Smart and integrated action against Qatar would be useful in containing and weakening a dangerous state that acts against Israel in various ways, often without a real response.
