I do not know whether last week was an especially stormy week, or just another stormy week, but between terrorist incidents in Jerusalem and the neighboring Kibbutz Tzuba, and the failed Israeli attack against Hamas’s leadership in Doha, the capital of Qatar – it was certainly a highly emotional one.
Among the stable elements of our foreign policy is the principle that every Israeli whose personal security is threatened while they are abroad – both in the military and natural disasters spheres – can expect Israel to do everything to extricate him/her from the situation.
The current hostage situation is probably the first time since the State of Israel was established that this principle has been called into question, even though the majority of 251 hostages have been returned from the Gaza Strip, either alive or dead.
Forty-eight hostages remain in the Gaza Strip; 20 of them possibly still alive but in immediate danger of death. Should all 48 be brought back as bodies, Israeli society is liable to suffer a fundamental blow that will take many years to recover from, if at all.
The second stable element in our foreign policy is the principle that anyone involved in the planning or execution of acts of terror against Israelis, in Israel or abroad, is considered to be a person under a death sentence, to be executed by the relevant Israeli forces. Over the years, numerous Palestinians and others have found themselves in this category, with few in Israel questioning the sagacity of this practice as part of the post-World War II slogan, “Never Again.”
Nevertheless, as happened in the initiative last Tuesday, there can be differences of opinion regarding the timing and location of the act of revenge, and perhaps some regret if the wrong person is eliminated. This occurred in the July 1973 case of the hapless Moroccan waiter in the Norwegian town of Lillehammer, who was mistakenly identified as one of the leaders of Black September, which had been responsible for the killing of 11 members of the Israeli Olympic delegation to the 1972 Munich Olympics. I do not think that anyone in Israel expressed regret for the fact that the wrong persons were killed in Doha.
The operation that was carried out last Tuesday was a particularly miserable event, not because of the identity of those whom it was designed to eliminate, nor even because the intelligence regarding their supposed presence in the location attacked was apparently faulty.
The two main problems were the timing of the operation, and the decision to attack in Doha, where the Hamas leaders were reportedly convened to discuss an American initiative to free all 48 remaining hostages in return for Israel ending the war in the Gaza Strip.
It has been reported that most of the top of the security establishment objected to the timing of the operation. Mossad director David Barnea reportedly was most adamant in his objection, while IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir maintained that the attack should not take place before negotiations for an agreement with Hamas were exhausted.
After the event, and before it became known that the operation had failed, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that if those giving sanctuary to terrorists refuse to bring them to justice and banish them, Israel will do what needs to be done.
Israel’s erratic decision-making is harmful
HAMAS LEADERS have been living in luxury in Doha, and their presence there has been known for many years. Israel might have raised the issue with the Qatari leadership, within the framework of its ambivalent relations with the rich and influential Gulf state.
It should also be noted that in February 2025, Netanyahu announced that from an Israeli perspective, Qatar is not an enemy state. “Qatar is a complex country, not a simple country,” he added.
The question is especially pertinent these days, when Israel’s international status has reached its lowest-ever level. The foreign media is full of descriptions and visual evidence of the catastrophic human and physical state of the Gaza Strip. Even if what is happening is not the result of a deliberate Israeli policy, Israel’s erratic decision-making and conduct do not look good.
Add to this the fact that numerous states that were considered friends of Israel (especially in Europe), even if occasionally critical friends, are now considering, or even starting to implement economic, sports, and cultural sanctions and boycotts against Israel. Many of them voted in favor of the non-binding UN General Assembly resolution, passed last Friday, in favor of the establishment of a Palestinian state to exist alongside Israel (142 voted in favor, 10 opposed, and 12 abstained).
Even US President Donald Trump declared that the Israeli attack in Doha “does not advance Israel or America’s goals” and that he is not thrilled about the whole situation. We do not know whether Israel informed the US in advance of its intention, but the US maintains a large airbase in Qatar and considers it an ally. It was reported that Trump promised the leader of Qatar that an Israeli attack on its territory would not recur.
The reaction of Qatar, and the Gulf States in general, including those that are members of the Abraham Accords, has also been negative. The strike might totally wreck this highly welcomed diplomatic project, which Netanyahu has lauded as advancing peace, without Israel being required to pay a territorial price.
At this stage, it is not clear what measures the Gulf states will take against Israel, or whether Qatar will continue to engage in attempts to reach an agreement between Israel and Hamas regarding the return of all the hostages in return for an end to the fighting.
However, continued Israeli talk of conquering Gaza City, and possibly the whole Gaza Strip, and of annexing territories within the West Bank (as openly advocated by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich), is an additional problem.
Did Netanyahu go too far this time? At least in Israel, opinions are divided on this question.
The writer has written journalistic and academic articles, as well as several books, on international relations, Zionism, Israeli politics, and parliamentarism. From 1994-2010, she worked in the Knesset Library and the Knesset Research and Information Center.