The Israeli strike on Hamas leaders in Doha could destabilize regional negotiations, cause Hamas to take harsher steps, and damage Qatar’s role as a key mediator in Middle Eastern diplomacy, Dr. Avner Saar told Maariv on Wednesday.
Dr. Saar, an expert in negotiation management and conflict-resolution models in the Middle East, and a lecturer at Western Galilee Academic College, spoke about the ramifications of the strike that occured last week. He also spoke of the Arab summit held days later.
“The Arab summit held in Doha on September 14, 2025, aimed to address regional stability and Qatar’s role as a central mediator in Middle Eastern conflicts, as well as the violation of its sovereignty following the dramatic operation,” Saar said.
The IDF and Israeli security services carried out a strike on a villa in Doha where senior Hamas officials were meeting. “The goal,” Saar said, “was to kill or wound the organization’s leadership.”
Saar noted that the outcome of the strike remains disputed. “Hamas declared its key leaders were unharmed and presented Taher al-Nunu on Al Jazeera as evidence. However, the son of Khalil al-Hayya was killed, members of his family were wounded, lower-level operatives were killed, and even a Qatari security officer died,” he said.
He added that the strike raised serious diplomatic concerns. “The fact that a state hosting a regional summit became a strike zone raises sharp questions about respect for sovereignty and the ability to negotiate in a secure environment.”
Qatar, which viewed itself as a bridge between Israel and Hamas, responded strongly.
“Qatar condemned the strike and suspended its participation as a mediator. This was intended to assert its sovereign dignity and regional status, while also presenting itself as a victim harmed while pursuing diplomacy,” Saar said.
In response, Egypt increased security around Palestinian officials on its territory and positioned itself as a possible replacement to lead future mediation efforts.
Hamas faces internal pressure to act
Saar said that within Hamas, the attack created a dilemma.
“On one hand, the strike highlighted their vulnerability. Even in Doha, a friendly capital, there is no immunity. This could harden their positions in negotiations to project strength. On the other hand, the loss of family members among senior officials has created pressure to reach a ceasefire and facilitate reconstruction.”
He noted that the erosion of trust in Qatar could lead Hamas to seek guarantees from additional states, including Turkey or Iran.
US and EU weigh next moves
“The strike overshadowed the summit’s original agenda,” Saar said. “It forced Qatar to reconsider whether it should continue as a mediator or scale back its involvement.”
He added that the US, which initiated the ceasefire framework, is now expected to deepen its role to keep the process from collapsing. At the same time, the European Union is showing signs of hesitation to invest in Gaza’s reconstruction while diplomatic uncertainty persists.
Saar drew comparisons to past targeted operations.
“History shows that attempts to eliminate Hamas leadership do not guarantee success. Similar to Operation Picking Anemones in 2003, the failed strike in Doha highlights the tension between military action and political fallout.”
Saar said future scenarios include hardened positions by Hamas, a pressured agreement, or broader regional escalation. All of these possibilities were reportedly discussed on the summit’s sidelines.
“The strike in Doha not only disrupted the fragile negotiations between Israel and Hamas, but also overshadowed the summit itself,” Saar concluded. “Israel now faces a strategic choice: whether to continue pursuing military operations alongside diplomacy, or to invest in preserving what remains of the diplomatic track. The central question is whether regional and international mediators can restore trust, or whether the summit will be remembered primarily as the prelude to another round of escalation.”