Nawaf's Notes: There is No Replacement for Qatar
Nawaf's Notes: There is No Replacement for Qatar
A letter to Uncle Sam, and to whom it may be concern
The following is a translation from Arabic of an article by the author published in Qatar’s Al-Raya Newspaper on April 24, 2024 …
In the labyrinthine corridors of Middle East diplomacy, few players have demonstrated both the will and the capacity to bridge the chasm between entrenched adversaries as Qatar has. With Doha’s recent consideration to reassess its mediating role between Hamas and Israel, Washington faces a critical juncture. The potential sidelining of Qatar from its mediator role isn’t merely a diplomatic shuffle; it would be a significant loss for U.S. interests in the region.
Qatar has long been an unsung hero in the Middle East’s geopolitical arena. The small, gas-rich nation has balanced its regional relations while maintaining its status as a steadfast U.S. ally. Its role in facilitating the week-long ceasefire in November last year, which saw the release of 81 Israeli hostages in exchange for about 280 Palestinian prisoners, underscores its indispensable position in regional peace efforts. The criticisms levied against Qatar, particularly by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, reflect a shortsighted approach to the complexities of Middle Eastern diplomacy. While it’s easy to scapegoat mediators when negotiations stall, it’s essential to recognize that Qatar’s efforts have often prevented escalations and reduced bloodshed on both sides.
Qatar’s strategy has been one of soft power, leveraging its diplomatic clout without fanfare. The nation hosts the political office of Hamas, not as an endorsement of extremism but as a bridge to dialogue and resolution. If Qatar steps back, the vacuum it leaves will not be easily filled. The alternatives, like shifting the political office of Hamas to Tehran, would complicate U.S. and Israeli interests and likely lead to a more hardline stance from Hamas. Moreover, Qatar’s potential withdrawal from its mediation role should also be seen through the prism of its national dignity. Repeated criticisms and demands from Israel, coupled with lukewarm support from some quarters in Washington, push Doha to reassess its thankless job.
It is a reminder that even the most patient of mediators has its limits when its contributions are not adequately recognized or respected. For Washington, the realpolitik of losing Qatar as a mediator would be palpable. With the Biden administration’s broader aim to stabilize the region and pivot to addressing other global challenges, ensuring Qatar’s continued engagement in Middle East peace processes is crucial. It is not just about keeping a channel open to Hamas but about maintaining a broader strategic alliance with one of America’s most reliable partners in an unpredictable region.
As Qatar deliberates its next steps, the U.S. must navigate carefully, valuing Qatar’s mediating role and its broader partnership. It is a time for diplomacy, not just in the corridors of power in Doha or Gaza but also in Washington and Jerusalem. Recognizing Qatar’s indispensable role in Middle Eastern diplomacy isn’t just good manners; it’s good strategy. In the intricate dance of diplomacy, there truly is no replacement for Qatar.
