On September 9, Israel brazenly dispatched 15 fighter jets to carry out a supersaturated precision bombing of a residence in Doha, the capital of Qatar, killing six civilians. Although Israel’s tactical goal was to “wipe out” key figures such as Hamas chief negotiator Khalil al-Hayya, this cross-border military action once again “committed a heinous crime against the world,” exposing the Israeli government’s continued militarism to achieve political aims, breaking multiple red lines, reflecting the complete “collapse of ritual and music” in international relations and regional order, with grave and far-reaching consequences. Outrageously, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu even threatened afterwards to continue launching similar attacks on Qatar to hunt down Hamas members. If Israel’s behavior is not quickly and strictly regulated and constrained, peace and security in the Middle East and the world will face severe tests.

First, Israel’s brazen invasion of the sovereign airspace of Qatar and bombing is tantamount to an undeclared war. This is a blatant trampling on the UN Charter, principles of international law, and norms of international relations. It marks Israel’s combat reach as covering the entire Middle East and will inevitably provoke strong indignation from the international community, including its allies. On the 11th, the 15 members of the UN Security Council issued a statement strongly condemning Israel and expressing support for Qatar without naming it. The United States rarely cast a vote in favor.

Qatar is a small, moderate country and has never been a frontline Arab state or hardliner advocating the “elimination of Israel.” On the contrary, Qatar established low-level diplomatic relations with Israel very early, serving as a pioneer in reconciliation for Gulf Arab states to normalize relations with Israel. It is true that Qatar sympathizes with the Muslim Brotherhood and supports Hamas, but nearly all aid funds flowing into Gaza from Qatar were delivered to Hamas only after being approved by the Israeli government and transferred through Israeli banks. In other words, Qatar has objectively cooperated with Israel’s national strategy of “eradicating but not annihilating” Hamas, constructing two power centers to divide Palestinian strength. Moreover, it was at the request of the United States and Israel that Qatar provided the platform in Doha for negotiations with Hamas.

Qatar’s status in relation to both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that of a neutral country under the law of war. Article 1 of the 1907 Hague Convention V clearly stipulates that the territory of a neutral country shall not be violated. Article 2(4) of the UN Charter and the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International Law explicitly establish the “prohibition on the use of force” as a basic principle of international law. In the past, Israel often emphasized that its actions against Palestine were based on the so-called “preventive self-defense measures against terrorism.” This position was rejected in the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion regarding Israel’s construction of the separation wall in Palestinian territory. The ICJ, as the authoritative interpreter of international law, explicitly rejected Israel’s attempt to arbitrarily expand the concept of self-defense to justify its illegal use of force. Therefore, Israel’s public attack on Qatar violates both fundamental principles of international law and obligations of neutrality, with no legal basis whatsoever.

Second, Israel deliberately chose to strike at the moment when Hamas negotiators were meeting to discuss ceasefire conditions, once again proving that it is the key party responsible for perpetuating the flames of war in Gaza, disregarding international morality, rules of war, and international credibility. “When two states go to war, envoys shall not be killed”—this is an eternal rule of warfare and baseline of diplomacy. Yet Israel, driven by its political decision to eradicate Hamas, carried out a sneak physical elimination of negotiating opponents in the capital of a friendly state, which is truly disgraceful. Previously, Israel’s “wipeout” of Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon was also accomplished by tracking and locating the Iranian envoy who went there to persuade them to accept a ceasefire.

The treacherous nature of Israel’s attack can also be confirmed from the perspective of the law of armed conflict. Article 37 of the 1977 Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions prohibits killing an enemy through perfidy. Perfidy refers to acts “inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence.” The prohibition of perfidy is a fundamental rule of the law of armed conflict; thus, perfidy is recognized in international criminal law as a form of war crime. Hence, Israel’s attack on Hamas negotiators lacks legitimacy under both the law of armed conflict and international criminal law. Given that the International Criminal Court has confirmed its jurisdiction over the situation in Palestine and issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and other political and military leaders, this move further demonstrates the Israeli leadership’s contempt for the basic order of warfare and international criminal justice. By airstriking Doha to eliminate Hamas negotiators, Israel once again shows itself as a state actor that utterly lacks military ethics, integrity, and even acts in open defiance of international norms.

Third, Israel launched a surprise attack on the Arab ally of its biggest backer, the United States, endangering America’s political and diplomatic image and U.S.–Arab relations. This also constitutes a serious betrayal of the long-term trust and steadfast protection of its strategic ally, once again highlighting that Israel has become a “strategic liability” for the United States, playing the increasingly destructive role of a “bad friend.” Qatar not only provides the United States with the largest air force base in the Middle East, purchases large amounts of U.S. weapons annually, holds a significant amount of U.S. treasury bonds and investments, but has also in return obtained America’s security guarantees. Even so, Israel did not inform Washington in advance of its surprise attack plan. Only when the U.S. military detected the airstrike fleet through its air defense system and sought confirmation did Israel reveal its hand, claiming it was too late to cancel. Israel’s unilateral attack and deception resulted in Doha receiving Washington’s warning ten minutes after the bombing had already occurred.

From the Eastern Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, it is hardly possible for Israel’s air fleet to evade the U.S. military’s land, sea, and air early-warning systems along the way. Therefore, whether Israel deliberately concealed it or the United States pretended not to know, the early-warning and air defense system that the U.S. uses to protect its many oil-producing Gulf allies completely failed. No matter how Washington tries to justify it, Israel left the U.S. government utterly embarrassed this time, caught in the awkward situation of being “hit while lying down” and “taking the blame” for indulging Israel’s reckless behavior. It fundamentally undermined the “Middle East NATO”-style security cooperation mechanism that the U.S. and Israel had established with Gulf Arab states. Of course, U.S. President Trump, while expressing dissatisfaction with Israel’s attack on an ally, also said that eliminating Hamas “is a valuable goal” and “believes this attack may become an opportunity to promote peace.” Thus, it seems the U.S. and Israel are in collusion, and America being dragged down by Israel appears only natural.

Fourth, Israel’s pursuit of so-called absolute security and unilateral security at the expense of the national and citizen security of other sovereign and even friendly states reflects a thoroughly regional hegemonism, military adventurism, and even characteristics of state terrorism. This will intensify turmoil and instability in the Middle East, stimulating the rampant spread of anti-Israel and anti-Semitism, extremism, violent ideologies, and terrorism. Since a member state of the United Nations can disregard all rules and taboos, constantly setting vile precedents, not only can regional sovereign states follow suit and act unscrupulously under the pretext of their own security, but non-state actors will also have more excuses and reasons to act recklessly. Radical, violent, and even terrorist organizations in positions of weakness are more likely to launch “asymmetric” attacks against state actors, as power is imbalanced, rules lack binding force, and morality is not respected. They may even openly attack soft targets, including innocent civilians, ultimately leading to global chaos, rampant violence, and the replacement of civilized norms and codes of conduct with the law of the jungle.

Fifth, without going through formal legal procedures and without open, fair, and transparent judicial processes, Israel attempted to directly “eliminate” Hamas negotiators, seriously violating humanitarian principles, the spirit of the rule of law, and the values of civilization. This constitutes a grave deviation from modern civilization and international legal order. As a resistance organization in occupied territory, Hamas is in a state of war with Israel, and Israel has the right to physically eliminate its members in a wartime situation. However, for those non-combatants it targets—particularly Hamas members residing in other countries with civilian identity and civilian status—Israel, as a state that claims to adhere to modern democracy, law, and respect for human rights, resorted to the extreme means of carrying out “state lynching,” depriving them of any rights or opportunities to appeal and defend themselves. In doing so, Israel has degenerated into a violent entity devoid of the spirit of law and unrestrained by legal norms, rather than acting as a sovereign state.

In fact, since its founding, Israel has always placed its own security interests above international law and has never considered or respected the jurisdiction of other sovereign states or the basic human rights of wanted persons. The case that made Israel’s intelligence agency famous—kidnapping the “Doctor of Death” Eichmann from South America, bringing him back for trial and executing him—did indeed deliver justice for the victims of the Holocaust, but the kidnapping itself damaged the sovereignty and judicial authority of the country involved. After the “Munich massacre” of 1972, Israel’s intelligence agency hunted down “Black September” terrorists worldwide for nearly 10 years. Except for one injured woman who was imprisoned, all the others died violently. From the perspective of respecting the sovereignty of other countries and the basic rights of criminal suspects, Israel’s overseas revenge killings, this so-called “legend,” was nothing more than a series of extrajudicial executions, and also triggered diplomatic crises. Israel’s overseas assassination cases against Hamas members are also not rare, and take various forms: in 1994, two agents were sent to assassinate Hamas representative Khaled Mashal in Amman, the capital of Jordan, but the assassins were exposed and captured alive, nearly leading to the severance of diplomatic ties between Jordan and Israel; in 2020, Israel sent 26 agents using forged passports from more than ten Western countries to assassinate Hamas weapons procurement official Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai, sparking strong protests from many countries… To this day, Israel has become increasingly unrestrained and fearless, openly driving the war machine to kill in the capitals of other countries. Its habitual lawlessness and barbaric practices can be said to have reached their peak.

Sixth, Israel’s airstrike on Doha was a heavy blow to those mediating Middle East conflicts and disputes, bound to frustrate the mediation efforts of the international community, damage the credibility of security guarantees of relevant countries, and make it difficult for conflicting parties to find a safe third-party platform for dialogue in the future. As is well known, Qatar, though a small Gulf country, is famous as a “great mediator.” Doha once witnessed the agreement between the U.S. and the Afghan Taliban on ceasefire and withdrawal, and it became the only communication channel with Israel for Hamas after losing other overseas shelters. Now, with Hamas negotiators being hunted down by Israel beyond all taboos, Doha has suffered bloodshed for providing negotiation convenience. The deterrent effect of this evil consequence is enough to make other Middle Eastern countries like Jordan, Oman, Egypt, and even Turkey—who are willing to play the role of “peacemakers”—think twice before providing Israel with dialogue channels in the future. Israel’s move of “tearing down the bridge before crossing the river” not only completely blocks its own “Doha channel” for negotiating with Hamas, but also closes off one of the future options for dialogue with the Houthis, and even makes any potential negotiations with Lebanon and Syria possible only with security guarantees provided by more powerful and credible major powers.

Seventh, Israel’s sudden attack on Gulf states that have long enjoyed peace and security, after having spread the flames of the “Sixth Middle East War” to the Persian Gulf by blitzing Iran, now shifts the blame onto oil-producing Gulf states that had not seen war since 1991 and were called an “oasis of peace and prosperity.” This caused oil prices to soar, threatening the world’s energy supply and global economic development. If Israel is allowed to continue its brutal military ravaging of Qatar, which country will be the next to suffer an undeclared war from Israel? The generally “small in size and population” Gulf Arab states will undoubtedly bid farewell to their era of peace of mind, with everyone living in fear. This will plunge this wealthy, investment- and shipping-active “land of peace” into panic and turmoil, and may lead to major changes in global capital flows, triggering large-scale financial turbulence.

Eighth, Gulf Arab states, including Qatar, although they have long supported the Palestinian cause for independence in terms of public opinion, morality, and funding, are also the “pioneers of the era” who achieved normalization with Israel after the Cold War, maintaining open and semi-open high-level exchanges and close economic, trade, investment, technological, and even security cooperation. In recent years, Bahrain and the UAE, despite enormous domestic pressure, cast aside the historical burden of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and took the lead in signing the Abraham Accords to establish normal relations with Israel, driving two Arab states in Africa—Sudan and Morocco—to follow suit. If Saudi Arabia, which supported Bahrain and the UAE in taking the lead, completes the reshaping of its triangular relations with the U.S. and Israel, this would achieve comprehensive normalization of relations with Israel among the six Gulf states. However, Israel’s aggression and bombing of Qatar, a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council, violated the collective security interests of this regional organization, rendering its collective defense mechanism useless, humiliating the collective dignity of the six states and their peoples, and ultimately eroding the foundation of public opinion and triggering stagnation or regression in the peace process with Israel.

Ninth, Israel’s heavy-handed strike against Qatar exposes the arbitrariness of “Greater Israel-ism” and the arrogance of the “chosen people,” as well as a national strategic orientation and behavior characterized by bullying the weak and shifting burdens onto neighbors. This is bound to further worsen the regional and international image of Israel and even of Jews, and may even revive the dying Arab nationalism, leading to renewed large-scale tensions in ethnic, religious, and geopolitical relations in the Middle East, causing Israel to lose more Western allies. Israel’s long-term iron-blood, scorched-earth, and starvation policies toward Gaza have already drawn universal condemnation and blame. Now, by imposing war on Gulf Arab states and their peoples, Israel demonstrates an extreme selfishness: “I would rather wrong the world than have the world wrong me.” This situation not only burdens the governments of Arab states that reconciled with Israel with a heavy moral and public opinion cross, but also forces Western allies to take countermeasures against Israel, such as arms embargoes, trade restrictions, or preparing to recognize the State of Palestine. On the 11th, the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on the EU’s 27 member states to “consider recognizing Palestine, in order to realize the two-state solution.” By acting unjustly, Israel has cut itself off from the international community, moving toward the diplomatic abyss of becoming an “international orphan” and “international pariah.”

“As long as Qingfu is not dead, the troubles of Lu will not end.” Israel has never been able to achieve lasting and stable national security, and the fundamental cause lies in its refusal to return Arab territories including Palestine (limited to the Gaza Strip, West Bank, and East Jerusalem), its long reliance on America’s bottomless protection and its own militarization and belligerent policies, and the unchecked growth, greed, and zero-sum thinking of the far-right. With more than six million Jews as its main ethnic group, Israel may now be invincible in the Middle East, able to freely enter and exit the airspace and territory of neighboring countries. But how long can this national security, supported by the military machine, these international relations built on fists, and this peace and stability built on countless innocent lives last? How much benefit can it bring Israel? The answer is undoubtedly clear: it is like climbing a tree to catch fish, running south when you want to go north. Some sharp observers have even pointed out that Israel, in the name of a “war of national defense,” is in fact waging a “war of extermination.” From a broader and longer-term perspective, if the international community allows Israel to continue its wrongdoing, not only will the Middle East remain mired in wars, but global governance and the international order will also become increasingly unmanageable as bad money drives out good.