Interrogating the Qatar Rift

7 Jun


The abrupt announcement that Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, UAE, Yemen, the Maldive Islands, and the eastern government in divided Libya have broken all economic and political ties with Qatar has given rise to a tsunami of conjecture, wild speculation, and most of all, to wishful thinking and doomsday worries. There is also a veil of confusion arising from mystifying reports that hackers with alleged Russian connections placed a fake news story that implicated Qatar in the promotion of extremist groups in the region. Given Russian alignments, it makes no sense to create conditions that increase the credibility of anti-Iran forces. And finally the timing and nature of the terrorist suicide attacks of June 7th on the Iranian Parliament and on the tomb of Ayatollah Khomeini adds a particularly mystifying twist to the rapidly unfolding Qatar drama, especially if the ISIS claim of responsibility is substantiated.


Four preliminary cautionary observations seem apt: (1) the public explanation given for this rupture is almost certainly disconnected from its true meaning. That is, the break with Qatar is not about strengthening the anti-ISIS, anti-extremist coalition of Arab forces. Such an explanation may play well in the Trump White House, but it is far removed from understanding why this potentially menacing anti-Qatar regional earthquake erupted at this time, and what it is truly about. (2) Any claim to provide a clear account of why? And why now? should be viewed with great skepticism, if not suspicion. There are in the regional context too many actors, crosscurrents, uncertainties, conflicts, mixed and hidden motives and contradictions at play as to make any effort at this stage to give a reliable and coherent account of this Qatar crisis bound to be misleading.


(3) Yet despite these caveats, there are several mainly unspoken dimensions of the crisis that can be brought to the surface, and sophisticate our understanding beyond the various self-serving polemical interpretations that are being put forward, including the centrality of Israeli-American backing for a tough line on Iran and the realization that Gulf grievances against Qatar have been brewing for recent years for reasons unrelated to ISIS, and led to an earlier milder confrontation in 2014 that was then quickly overcome with the help of American diplomacy.


And (4) The anti-Iran fervor only makes sense from the perspective of the Gulf monarchies (other than Qatar) and Israel, but seems radically inconsistent with American regional interests and counter-ISIS priorities—Iran is not associated with any of the terrorist incidents occurring in Europe and the United States, and ISIS and Iran are pitted against each other on sectarian grounds. Intriguingly, neither Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), nor Israel, that is, the principal antagonists of Qatar, have been ever targeted by ISIS.


The main contention of the anti-Qatar Arab governments, led by Saudi Arabia, is that this coordinated diplomatic pushback is motivated by anti-terrorist priorities. On its face this seems to be a ridiculous claim to come from the Saudis, and can only make some sense as part of a calculated effort to throw pursuing dogs in the hunt for ISIS off a course that if followed would inevitably implicate the Riyadh government. It has long been known by intelligence services and academic experts that it is Saudi Arabia, including members of its royal family, that have been funding Jihadi extremism in the Middle East and has for many years been spending billions to spread Salifist extremism throughout the Islamic world.


By comparison, although far from innocent or consistent of terrorist linkages, as well as being internally oppressive, especially toward its migrant foreign workers, Qatar is a minor player in this high stakes political imbroglio. For the Saudis to take the lead in this crusade against Qatar may play well in Washington, Tel Aviv, and London, but fools few in the region. Trump has with characteristic ill-informed bravado has taken ill-advised credit for this turn against Qatar, claiming it to be an immediate payoff of his recent visit to the Kingdom, ramping up still further the provocative buildup of pressure on Iran. To claim a political victory given the circumstances rather than admit a geopolitical faux pas might seem strange for any leader other than Trump. It is almost perverse considering that the al-Udeid Air Base is in Qatar, which is the largest American military facility in the Middle East, operated as a regional command center actively used in bombing raids against Iraq and Afghanistan, and serviced by upwards of 10,000 American military personnel.


Netanyahu warmongers will certainly be cheered by this course of events and Israel has not hidden its support for the anti-Qatar moves of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). It achieves two Israeli goals: its longtime undertaken to encourage splits and disorder in the Arab world and its campaign to maximize pressures on Iran.


Interestingly, Jeremy Corbyn at the start of the week when the momentous British elections are scheduled to take place, called on Teresa May to release a report (prepared while David Cameron was prime minister), supposedly an explosive exposure of Saudi funding and support for Islamic extremism in the Middle East. All in all, a first approximation of the Qatar crisis is to view it as a desperate move by Riyadh to get off the hot seat with respect to its own major responsibility for the origins and buildup of political extremism in the Middle East, which has indirectly produced the inflaming incidents in principal European cities during the last several years. Such a move to isolate and punish Qatar was emboldened by the blundering encouragement of Donald Trump, whether acting on impulse or at the beckoning of Israel’s and Saudi leaders, confusing genuine counter-terrorist priorities with a dysfunctional effort to push Iran against the wall. Trump seems to forget, if he ever knew, that Iran is fighting against ISIS in Syria, has strongly reaffirmed moderate leadership in its recent presidential elections, and if Iran were brought in from the cold could be a major calming influence in the region. True, Iran has given support to Hezbollah and Hamas, but except in Syria not with much effect, and on a scale far smaller than what other actors in the region have been doing to maintain their control and push their agendas. In effect, if Washington pursued national interests in the spirit of political realism, it would regard Iran as a potential ally, and put a large question mark next to its two distorting ‘special relationships,’ with Saudi Arabia and Israel. In effect, reverse its regional alignments in a way that could replace turmoil with stability, but this is not about to happen. The American media, and thoughtful citizens, should at least be wondering ‘why?’ rather than staring into darkness of a starless nighttime sky.


But this is not all. The Saudis, along with the UAE and Egypt, have long resented and maybe feared the early willingness of Qatar to give some sanctuary and aid and comfort to various elements of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. It is hardly farfetched to assume that Israel is outraged by the Emir of Qatar’s friendship and earlier support for the Hamas exiled leader, Khaled Mashaal. Saudi Arabia strives to obscure its incoherent approach to political Islam. It loudly proclaims Sunni identity when intervening in Syria, waging war in Yemen, and calling for confrontation with Iran, while totally repudiating its sectarian identity when dealing with societally or democratically oriented Islamic movements in neighboring countries. Such an anti-democratiing orientation was dramatically present when Riyadh and Abu Dhabi scolded Washington for abandoning Mubarak’s harsh authoritarian secular rule in Egypt back in 2011 and then welcoming the anti-Morsi coup led by General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi two years later, even welcoming its bloody suppression of Sunni adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood. As has been long obvious to close and honest observers of the Kingdom, the Saudi monarchy has become so fearful of an internal uprising challenging its oppressive rule that it will oppose any liberalizing or democratizing challenge anywhere in its neighborhood. The Kingdom is particularly wary of its Shia minority that happens to be concentrated in locations near where the main Saudi oil fields are located. Similar concerns also help explain why Bahrain behaves as it does as it also fearful of a domestic Shia led majority opposition, which has made it a strategically dependent, yet ardent, adherent of the anti-Qatar coalition.


Also far more relevant than acknowledged is the presence of Al Jazeera in Doha, which at various times has voiced support for the Arab Uprisings of 2011, criticism of the Israeli practices and policies toward the Palestinians, and provided an Arabic media source of relatively independent news coverage throughout the region. Qatar is guilty of other irritants of the dominant Gulf political sensibility. It has arranged academic positions for such prominent Palestinian dissidents as Azmi Bashara and more than its neighbors has given welcome to intellectual refugees from Arab countries, especially Egypt. Given the way the Gulf rulers close off all political space within their borders it is to be expected that they find the relative openness of Qatar a threat as well as consider it to be a negative judgment passed on their style of governance.


Qatar is very vulnerable to pressure, but also has certain strengths. Its population of 2.5 million (only 200,000 of whom are citizens), imports at least 40% of its food across the Saudi border, now closed to the 600-800 daily truck traffic. Not surprisingly, this sudden closure has sparked panic among Qataris, who are reportedly stockpiling food and cash. The Doha stock market dropped over 7% on the first day after the Gulf break was announced. Qatar is the world’s largest exporter of liquefied natural gas, and is a major source of Turkish investment capital. Western Europe is wary of this American project to establish an ‘Arab NATO,’ and sees it as one more manifestation of Trump’s dysfunctional and mindless impact on world order.


What this portends for the future remains is highly uncertain. Some look upon these moves against Qatar as a tempest in a teapot that will disappear almost as quickly as it emerged. The U.S. Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, and the Secretary of Defense, Jim Mattis, have urged mediation and offered reassuring comments about anti-ISIS unity remaining unimpaired. It is true that the existence of the Udeid Air Base in Qatar may in time dilute deference to the Saudi-led desire to squeeze the government in Doha, possibly to the point of its collapse. A more fearsome scenario is that the Trump encouraged confrontation sets the stage for a coup in Qatar that will be quickly supported by Washington as soon as Riyadh gives the green light, and will be promoted as part of the regional buildup against Iran. The notorious ceremony in which King Salmon, Trump, and Sisi were pictured standing above that glowing orb with their arms outstretched can only be reasonably interpreted as a pledge of solidarity among dark forces of intervention. Many of us supposed that George W. Bush’s policy of ‘democracy promotion’ that provided part of the rationale for the disastrous 2003 attack on Iraq was the low point in American foreign policy in the Middle East, but Trump is already proving us wrong.


While this kind of ‘great game’ is being played at Qatar’s expense in the Gulf, it is highly unlikely that other major players, especially Iran, Russia, and Turkey will remain passive observers, especially if the crisis lingers or deepens. Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Mohammed Zarif, has non-aggressively tweeted to the effect that “neighbors are permanent; geography can’t be changed,” stating his view that the occasion calls for dialogue, not coercion. If the isolation of Qatar is not quickly ended, it is likely that Iran will start making food available and shipping other supplies to this beleaguered tiny peninsular country whose sovereignty is being so deeply threatened.


Russia, has been long collaborating with Iran in Syria, will likely move toward greater solidarity with Tehran, creating a highly unstable balance of power in the Middle East with frightening risks of escalation and miscalculation. Russia will also take advantage of the diplomatic opportunity to tell the world that the U.S. is seeking to raise war fevers and cause havoc by championing aggressive moves that further the ambitions of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Israel. Such Russian diplomacy is likely to play well in Europe where Trump’s recent demeaning words in Brussels to NATO members made the leading governments rethink their security policies, and to view the United States as an increasingly destabilizing force on the global stage, such feeling being reinforced by the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Change Agreement.


Turkey seems to believe that its immediate effort should be similar to that of the Tillerson and Mattis approach, having tentatively offered to mediate, and advocates finding a way back to a posture of at least peaceful co-existence between Qatar, the Gulf, and the rest of the Arab world. Turkey has had a positive relationship with Qatar, which includes a small Turkish military facility and large Qatari investments in the Turkish economy.


To cool things down, the Foreign Minister of Qatar, Sheik Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al-Thani, while denying the allegations, has also joined in the call for mediation and even reconciliation. Bowing to Gulf pressures, Qatar has prior to the current crisis withdrawn its welcome from Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood exiles, and seems poised to yield further to the pressures of the moment, given its small size, political vulnerability, and intimations of possible societal panic.


While the civilian population of Yemen is faced with imminent famine as an intended consequence of the Saudi intervention, the Saudis seems to be again using food as a weapon, this time to compel Qatar to submit to its regional priorities and become a GCC team player with respect to Iran—joining in the preparation of a sectarian war against Iran while maintaining a repressive hold over political activity at home. One preliminary takeaway is that ISIS dimension is serving as a smokescreen to draw attention away from a far more controversial agenda. The Saudis are deeply implicated in political extremism throughout the region, having likely paid heavily for being treated, temporarily at least, as off limits for Jihadi extremism. Qatar, too is tainted, but mainly by being a minor operative in Syrian violence and in 2015 paying ISIS an amount rumored to be as high as $1 billion to obtain the release of 26 Qataris, including members of the royal family, taken hostage while on a falcon hunting party, of all things, in Iraq. We can gain some glimmers of understanding of what is motivating these Arab governments to act against Qatar, but little sympathy. In comparison, the new U.S. foreign policy in the region defies any understanding beyond its adoption of a cynical and unworkable geopolitical stance, which certainly does not engender any sympathy from the victimized peoples of the region, but rather fear and loathing.  

15 Responses to “Interrogating the Qatar Rift”

  1. Steph June 7, 2017 at 12:52 pm #

    merci, Prof !
    It all certainly Hurts the head !
    i can only look forward to Gaia being freed from the ( in)human pestilence…
    starting with the monsters of d.c.

  2. Vincent Di Stefano June 7, 2017 at 5:53 pm #

    Thank you for your constancy, perseverance and fidelity in maintaining this watching brief. Your posts provide more clarity and insight than can ever possibly emerge from the controlled and controlling media.

  3. peteybee June 7, 2017 at 8:34 pm #

    Reblogged this on Spread An Idea.

  4. Beau Oolayforos June 7, 2017 at 11:52 pm #

    Dear Professor Falk,

    Just the kind of clarification that I, for one, had been hoping for. As you say, much remains unknown, but what is abundantly clear is that we must, if we wish to survive, put our own house in order by installing more enlightened and responsible leadership in DC. The constitutional means for regime change are there, and the sooner it happens, the better for everyone.

  5. anan June 8, 2017 at 12:03 am #

    “Intriguingly, neither Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), nor Israel, that is, the principal antagonists of Qatar, have been ever targeted by ISIS.”

    Respectfully this is 200% wrong. ISIS is strongly committed to conquering the ruling the whole world, including these three countries. They have viciously attacked KSA and the UAE and will continue to do so.

    Al Qaeda/Taliban and their allies by contrast have much closer ties to the Gulf Establishment and Pakistani Deep State. Something ISIS always uses in their propaganda to much effect.

    Strangely, One of the reasons that AQ/Taliban derive so much support from the KSA/UAE establishment; is because they fight ISIS. Also because they hate twelvers, Sufis and all muslim minorities.

    Both the AQ coalition and the ISIS coalition are a little busy right now. But it is only a matter of time before they get down to “a final solution to the Jewish question.”

    ISIS use to be a part of AQ until 2011. ISIS disagreed on who should succeed their commander in chief Osama Bin Laden; and split. Those that swore allegiance to Zawahiri (and Mullah Omar) remained AQ affiliated.

    ISIS, and AQ/Taliban are both primarily focused on conquering and ruling muslims; and on killing their muslim enemies. This is why attacking the Ikhwan/Hamas and Palestinian Authorities is more important to them in the short run than attacking Israel. AQ and ISIS are especially furious that Hamas and PA have accepted the two state solution and begun negotiations with Israel. They plan to take their revenge soon enough. After over running the West Bank and Gaza; they hope to invade and destroy Israel.

    This more than anything else is probably why Hamas and the PA have accepted the two state solution and appear serious about peace negotiations with Israel. Ikhwan/Hamas and PA are extremely afraid of ISIS and AQ; which represents a vastly greater threat to them than Israel ever did.

    Sadly the Israelis are blowing this golden opportunity to ally with the Palestinians against a shared enemy that wants to destroy Palestinian and Israeli alike.

    If not for President Obama’s intervention it is probable that ISIS and AQ would have overrun almost all of Syria and most of Lebanon by now; and decimated Hezbollah.

    Nasrallah would likely have begged the IDF to save Hezbollah from defeat. Fortunately for Nasrallah, POTUS Obama saved him.


    Why do you think Putin wouldn’t try to drive a wedge between Qatar and the GCC/Arab League? There isn’t sufficient evidence to prove Putin is driving such a wedge; but disunity in the GCC and Arab League would enhance Russian influence and prestige from the perspective of some Russian analysts.

    Putin is smart enough to know that he needs Sunni allies, and needs to avoid becoming over dependent on Iran. This is why Putin is attempting outreach to Iran’s rivals (Pakistan, Turkey, Qatar, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Sudan). Putin is also attempting outreach to KSA, UAE, Jordan and the rest of the GCC; plus the free syrian army.

  6. Schlüter June 8, 2017 at 1:06 am #

    Dear Professor Falk, thanks for the very insightful and interesting article! Maybe of interest: “Israel and IS, Anymore Questions?”:
    Moreover it appears to me that the US Neocon Power Elite is interested in creating a broad chaos situation in Middle East as a Barriere against the efforts for a Eurasian Cooperation:
    „Geo-Politics: The Core of Crisis and Chaos and the Nightmares of the US Power Elite“
    Best regards

  7. Beau Oolayforos June 8, 2017 at 5:32 pm #

    Dear Professor Falk,

    In a recent piece, you said that the 3 most hopeful signs for peace in the Middle East are the election of moderate leadership in Iran, Palestinian hunger-strikers, and BDS. Could it be that Doha, with its congratulations to Rouhani, its hospitality to certain Palestinians, and Al Jazeera’s attitude toward BDS, is being punished for embracing all 3? If so, then “…blessed be the peace-makers…..”

    • Richard Falk June 8, 2017 at 5:45 pm #

      As usual, perceptive and thought-provoking. I suspect you are on the right track as usual. Greetings, Richard

      • Israel has no right to exist June 13, 2017 at 6:35 am #

        Mr. Falk,

        ‘anon’ is a zionist troll pro Israel. No one should engaged him.

    • Gene Schulman June 9, 2017 at 7:23 am #


      You and your readers might find this piece by Stanley Cohen in the weekend edition of Counterpunch useful:

  8. Laurie Knightly June 10, 2017 at 12:04 pm #

    A few days ago, I used this essay in a round table Current Events discussion group of 14 members. An issue that glaringly caught our attention, was the ratio of ‘workers’ to citizens. As I wasn’t aware of the conditions of these workers, I have prepared that for our next weekly meeting. Utterly disgusting! It appears that after a Nepalese appeal to Fifa regarding the 50.000 cheap labor pool that is building the stadium, some improvements were made [for that group] – like 4 in a room, as opposed to typical 8-10 – some indoor toilets, better food, and some electricity. Small wonder that the citizens are so wealthy. Also, raised was the usual religious loyalty question – always a factor. And certainly the issue of a US military base that seems to conflict with other questions, but might be part of a questionable plan. I brought in a map showing US bases surrounding Iran and that is very revealing. All new to me and others.

    I am also wondering if this worker/citizen ratio and import dependency would make it possible for a coup regarding the ruling monarchy. Whatever went on between Trump and the Saudis must be part of some unconfirmed strategy. It’s not that clear, moreover, regarding Yemen and the Houthis. Did the Houthis become the preferred overlords in Yemen? Or does one just check for allied loyalty?

    Lots of questions but answers will generate more questions. What’s going on here?

  9. Brewer June 10, 2017 at 11:09 pm #

    I have been following the Palestine issue for over 25 years now. It has led me to deeper understanding of “The Great Game” than I ever dreamed. A quarter century ago I had no idea of the connections. For some time now I have been astonished at how seemingly unrelated incidents in the M.E. conform to a pattern largely explained by the activities of that loosely allied group (capital/MIC/Far Right/Likud) we have come to call “neo-conservatives”.
    Where they strike next never fails to surprise however. It seems to me that they are several steps ahead all the way. Just when one begins to think they may be in retreat on one front, they open another.
    We thought Trump might be a spanner in the works but alas, he seems to have fallen under their sway. The British election offers some hope of an opposing groundswell however. Younger voters seem to be more aware – possibly from more internet-based information uptake.

  10. fudmier June 13, 2017 at 7:47 pm #

    View.. consider Qatar gas a game changer; should Doha join the Iran- Russia pipeline; the gas by pipeline to Europe game is over.


  1. 6.16.2017 Daily Links | Daily Links & News - June 16, 2017

    […] More on Qatar – […]

  2. Pourquoi cette attaque contre le Qatar ? | Cayo Hueso - June 17, 2017

    […] Richard Falk “Global Justice in the 21st Century”. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: