The tail wags the dog hard

AT PENPOINT

The attack by Israel on Doha was doubly shocking, because not only was it a blatant violation of sovereignty, but also an exhibition of how the USA could not protect its allies. It was perhaps inevitable that the Arab-Islamic Summit in Doha, being held to protest this attack, would contain so many US allies, who were worried that they could be targeted next.

US support for Israel could be seen from the fact that the Qatari Prime Minister, Sheikh Muhmmad ibn Abdur Rahman Al-Thani, two days before the Summit, has meetings with Secretary of State Mark Rubio and Vice-President J.D. Vance, and dinner with President Donald Trump. The summit on Monday was preceded on Sunday by a meeting of foreign ministers, which prepared the resolution to be passed by the Summit. The resolution condemned Israeli ‘aggressive actions’, but offered no penalties for a repetition, beyond a delay in the normalization of ties with Israel.

This makes clear that there is a n0rmalization process, which is to go forward, but that Israel should not interrupt it by attacking those countries which are close to ‘normalization’, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

However, the Israeli launch of its offensive against Gaza virtually showed up the Summit as an illustration of how powerless the friends of Palestine are.

The nearest the Summit came to action was an invoking of the GCC Defence Pact. The only Gulf Army to see action against Israel was Saudi Arabia in 1973, when they did not distinguish themselves even if they did not disgrace themselves. Otherwise, there was nothing, and it was easy to understand why Israel felt it could act with impunity.

It should not be forgotten that that attack on Qatar was virtually an attack on the USA itself, because it hosts the headquarters of the naval and air force components of the US Central Command. The USA refrained from condemning the strikes, which meant that it preferred to protect Israeli in its clash with ‘the most allied ally.’

That phrase was coined by Pakistani President Ziaul Haq to describe Pakistan’s relationship to the USA during the Afghan Jihad, but it could be applied to Qatar. Qatar not just has its geographical position commanding the Straits of Hormuz to recommend it, but is itself a major oil and gas producer. The attack on Hamas leaders was particularly painful for the existence of the Hamas office there, and the $1.8 billion transferred to Hamas by Qatar, was after consultation with the USA and Israel. Indeed, the setting up of the office was at the USA’s request, because the USA needed a channel of communication with Hamas.

Qatar has paid the price, being treated virtually as a bystander, because Israel had used the credibility of Qatar to lure Hamas leaders there, and had ignored centuries, indeed millennia, of the sanctity of heralds’ persons, to attack them. Qatar has said that it will continue its mediation efforts. That appears to  be the takeaway from the White House meetings of Prime Minister Muhammad ibn Abdurrehman, but neither Hamas nor Israeli willingness has been elicited.

The governments are obliged to take strong positions because they want to survive public obloquy. In particular, the USA must realize that the oil-rich monarchies will have difficulty surviving this evidence that their compact with their people, to enforce Islam, is in conflict with their US alliance.

It should not be forgotten that the attacks were carried out to prevent the negotiations from leading to a ceasefire. That seems to be an Israeli tactic: that of launching an air strike when diplomacy appears likely to yield results. It bombed Iran at a time when Iran and the USA appeared to be inching towards a nuclear agreement. It now attacked Qatar at a time when Hamas was about to agree that Israel had already agreed to. Resumption of negotiations is something Israel does not want, as it would have liked to avoid anything that might prevent it from carrying out the big push into Gaza City itself.

US Secretary of State Mark Rubio has said that Hamas had been eliminated, so now it was time to look towards the reconstruction of Gaza. More than anything else, what matters to the Arab monarchies is whether the USA will help prop them in place. If Israel is allowed to run rampant through the region, how will these regimes perpetuate themselves? The association is not ideological, especially with the end of the Cold War, so it can only be interest. That interest is, and has been since World War I and the revolt against Turkey, oil. To buttress that, Israel was founded in 1948, but it should not be forgotten that while the USA values Israel was an outpost in the Middle East, it is also reflective of the strong Zionist lobby in the USA itself. The Arab and Muslim world have no answer to that.

However, the USA has got to consider the situation it has got itself into. One ally is attacking another not because of any reason, but solely to preserve its ruler in office. (It would be a mistake to think that Israel has any reason to wish the conflict prolonged, except that it enables the Netanyahu government to stay in office.) That ally cannot be brought under control. The tail has begun to wag the dog.

Iran proposed that Israel be de-recognised by the countries which have done so. It is certainly possible, for Iran has done so. Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Sudan, Morocco and the UAE have recognised, but derecognition is not possible, for different reasons, but for the three monarchies, future support for the dynasty is also a factor. That is the same factor that applies to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Oman.

Apart from derecognition, Pakistan is proposing that Israel’s membership of the UN be suspended. There are other possibilities of strong action, such as Arab and Muslim countries joining the South African suit against Israel at the International Court of Justice, in which it has been ruled that Israel must answer the charge of genocide. Another idea is the creation of a protection force against Israeli aggression.

This is all a skirting of the real issue, which is that the existence of Israel is a destabilizing factor in the region. It is perceptive of Netanyahu to perceive that a two-state solution would not work. The Zionist project was meant to displace the native population, and merely perpetuated the injustice that Jewry was suffering from, and which led to Zionism developing among Jews: the pogroms of the 19th century, and then the biggest pogrom of all, Hitler’s ‘Final Solution’. However, Jews ended up committing their own pogrom.

The USA must realize that Israel is beginning to harm it, and its support for Israel will lead it downpaths that might lose it the access to oil it craves. The Arab regimes can swim against the tide of public opinion for only so long. The Arab Spring saw only one rich state change its government,Libya. Egypt, Yemen, Tunisia, were all non-oil states. None of the monarchies, which the USA supported, fell. What happens if the people of the monarchies see that their ruling dynasties’ friendship with the USA could not prevent Israeli attacks? And then what happens if the present regimes are replaced by pro-Palestinian forces, which are inimical to the USA and hostile to Israel? Derecognition might become the least of US worries.

The USA should realize that Palestine is not just an Arab issue, which Qatar could be seen as. Such non-Arab countries as Iran, Turkiye and Pakistan are viewing this through a Palestinian lens, and their involvement reflects their perception of the Palestinian issue as an Islamic one, and Qatar by association.

The governments are obliged to take strong positions because they want to survive public obloquy. In particular, the USA must realize that the oil-rich monarchies will have difficulty surviving this evidence that their compact with their people, to enforce Islam, is in conflict with their US alliance.