The Israeli strike in Doha shattered the illusion of diplomacy, exposed Hamas’s broken command, and forced the world to confront the reality that negotiations were never peace talks but theatre.
In a Nutshell
On 9 September 2025, Israel launched a precision airstrike in Doha, Qatar, killing senior Hamas officials who had long enjoyed sanctuary in luxury hotels while presenting themselves as “negotiators.” Qatar denounced the attack as a violation of sovereignty; the UN’s Human Rights Chief warned it would “destabilise the region.”
But the strike was not random, nor was its timing accidental. Days earlier, Donald Trump now the leading Republican presidential candidate issued an ultimatum: Hamas had until mid-September to accept a US-backed ceasefire deal or face consequences. Rumours swirled that Hamas intended to reject the terms, which required the release of all Israeli hostages. Israel acted before the charade could play out, targeting leaders who embodied the hypocrisy of “diplomacy” with terrorists.
The attack raises urgent questions. Was Hamas even capable of delivering a peace deal? With its Gaza command decimated, communications severed, and its leadership fractured between exile and battlefield, the organisation may no longer have the ability or the will to negotiate at all.
Sources: Reuters, 16 Sept 2025, AP News, 16 Sept 2025
The Main Course
Why Doha? Why Now?
The Hamas officials in Qatar were not field commanders. They were the “political bureau” the faces of a terror movement that has always worn two masks: one for killing, another for negotiation. By striking them in Doha, Israel made clear there would be no safe havens, no air-conditioned sanctuaries for men directing terror from afar.
The timing was equally deliberate. Trump’s ultimatum had forced Hamas into a corner. To accept the deal meant releasing all Israeli hostages a move tantamount to surrender. Hostages are Hamas’s lifeblood, its only bargaining chip. To give them up would strip the group of leverage and legitimacy. Everyone knew Hamas would reject the deal. Israel chose to act before the rejection could become yet another round of international theatre, with diplomats wringing hands while Hamas bought time.
A Broken Chain of Command
Even had Hamas wanted to accept the deal, questions lingered about its capacity. Months of relentless Israeli strikes have gutted Hamas’s command structure inside Gaza. Communications between Doha and the tunnels are sporadic at best. Many of the commanders who once coordinated political and military strategies are dead. The Doha “bureau” has been reduced to a diplomatic mask with little real control.
This raises the fundamental question: who, exactly, was Trump’s ultimatum addressed to? The exiles in Qatar, insulated and wealthy? Or the broken remnants in Gaza, consumed by survival? The strike highlighted this absurdity that the men in Doha could no longer guarantee compliance with any agreement.
The Strategic Message
Israel’s attack also served a wider purpose. For years, Qatar has positioned itself as mediator, hosting Hamas, the Taliban, and even interlocutors for Iran. It basked in the glow of being indispensable. By striking in Doha, Israel shattered that illusion. Qatar has been exposed not as neutral mediator but as enabler of terror. The emir’s carefully cultivated image lies in ruins.
For Israel, the calculation is clear: Hamas must be treated as a terror group, not a political party. And anyone harbouring its leaders should expect consequences.
The Media Recommends
The coverage was as predictable as it was shallow.
Reuters labelled the strike “a dangerous escalation.”
The Guardian claimed it “undermines fragile ceasefire diplomacy.”
Al Jazeera thundered about “Qatar’s sovereignty.”
What none of them asked was obvious: why are internationally recognised terrorists being housed in five-star hotels and treated as diplomats? Why are talks conducted with a group that has no intention — and perhaps no capacity — to keep its word? Why is surrender, which Hamas equates with suicide, treated as a plausible negotiating outcome?
The Merlow View
History teaches us that illusions are often shattered violently. In 1944, Allied bombers struck Gestapo headquarters in Copenhagen, destroying the myth of Nazi impunity. In the 1990s, when Serbia’s leaders thought they could negotiate by day and massacre by night, NATO bombs reminded them otherwise.
Israel’s Doha strike belongs in that lineage. It was not an act of recklessness but of clarity. It declared that Hamas’s so-called “political bureau” was never separate from its terror apparatus. By eliminating them, Israel has refused to indulge the fiction that terrorists can don suits and become diplomats.
The fantasy beloved of the UN and Western chancelleries is that Hamas might one day morph into a partner for peace. The reality is harsher. To release all hostages, as Trump’s deal demanded, would mean the end of Hamas itself. No terror group in history has voluntarily surrendered its leverage. To believe otherwise is not diplomacy; it is delusion.
In Short…
The invitation here is subtle but urgent. The Doha strike was not merely a military operation but a mirror held up to the world. It exposed the hollowness of “peace talks” with a group that survives only through violence and hostage-taking. It reminded us that peace will never come through theatre staged in Gulf hotels, but only through dismantling terror at its root.
To recognise this is not to endorse endless war but to embrace clarity. Negotiations are meaningless when one side cannot or will not deliver. Until Hamas is dismantled, not rebranded, there will be no peace in Gaza only theatre, and tragedy.
Share this: