Exclusive to “The Beiruter”: Israeli Rhetoric on Forced Displacement Raises Alarm in the Region

Doha is no longer merely the city of quiet negotiations. It has suddenly become the epicenter of a regional storm, revealing the scale of the latent explosion within the Middle Eastern scene. In just a few months, the Qatari capital shifted from intercepting Iranian missiles last June to facing an unprecedented Israeli strike on homes and offices of Hamas leaders finding itself paying a double price for its role as a principal mediator in the Gaza and hostage files.

For decades, Qatar played the part of the “trusted broker” in regional crises, from Afghanistan and Chechnya to Gaza. Yet the recent Israeli strike sent a stark message to Hamas and the broader resistance axis. There is no haven, even in an Arab capital that has maintained diplomatic contact with Israel since the 1990s. The operation transcended the logic of security and carried an unmistakable political warning, undermining Doha’s ability to sustain its mediating role, particularly in ceasefire and prisoner-exchange negotiations.

At the same time, Israeli rhetoric has reached what observers describe as its “most extreme” in years, with growing emphasis on resolving the Palestinian question through forced displacement. Linking this discourse to the strikes in Doha, a Gulf source told The Beiruter that Israel’s strategy may go beyond military retaliation. It could, the source warned, represent a deliberate attempt to derail the political track altogether  particularly the two-state solution initiative currently championed by France and Saudi Arabia at the United Nations.

The closing statement of Doha’s Arab-Islamic emergency summit unanimously rejected attacks on mediator capitals, labeling the Israeli strike a “grave violation of regional security”. Diplomatic sources present at the meetings revealed to The Beiruter that discussions touched on unconventional escalation options, including reviewing normalization agreements with Israel and coordinating collective pressure through the UN and the Security Council.

Several Arab and Islamic delegations went further, hinting at reconsidering security cooperation with Washington if the Trump administration fails to restrain Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government from targeting mediators. This approach was reflected in the summit’s final communiqué, which combined “intensified diplomatic pressure” on one hand, with a strong hilight on the need to “strengthen self-defense capacities” of Arab and Islamic states on the other.

Photo: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Reuters.

Israel’s position has unsettled Washington, which fears that the hostage deal expected before the turn of the year could collapse. President Donald Trump has demanded its swift conclusion to free up bandwidth for his domestic priorities and the looming midterm congressional elections. According to American sources, the State Department recognizes the difficulty of sustaining negotiations through mediators who themselves are vulnerable targets raising doubts about Qatar and Egypt’s ability to ensure continuity in any negotiating track.

Despite the risks, Qatar retains a unique ability to maneuver. It is not merely a neutral broker but a player with an intricate web of ties to Hamas, Tehran, and Washington. This affords Doha leverage that could prove decisive in any negotiations. Alongside Egypt, it remains a cornerstone in efforts to contain the spiraling conflict particularly after the strike on Doha demonstrated that the war has reached the region’s very capitals.

The current stage shows that the conflict has spilled far beyond Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen, placing the stability of the entire Arab world at risk. The Doha summit proposed a three-part framework to redefine regional security, focusing on economic integration, strengthened self-defense, and coordinated diplomatic pressure.

The summit’s final statement reflects a clear recognition that what happened in Doha is not an isolated incident, but a turning point in the trajectory of the conflict. Once again, Qatar finds itself at the heart of the storm paying the price of its role. This is not a fleeting episode but a potential watershed moment that could plunge the region into a cycle of violence difficult to escape. The Arab position, itself at a historic crossroads, emerged from Doha with a call to move beyond reactive postures toward a comprehensive strategy that combines diplomatic pressure, enhanced self-reliance, and a steadfast commitment to the two-state solution. For in the end, regional security is indivisible, and peace requires concessions from all sides.