America's true strength has been its capacity to avoid force, not deploy it
A former Qatari prime minister has stepped forward with a sweeping historical indictment: that Israel spent thirty years quietly steering American foreign policy toward a war with Iran, and that the promise used to finally close the deal — a swift, clean collapse of the Iranian regime — proved to be a fiction. The war that began in February has since drawn retaliatory strikes across the Gulf, threatened civilian populations from Gaza to Qatar, and forced a reckoning among regional powers about whether the old architecture of American-backed security can still hold. In moments like these, history asks not only who lit the match, but who built the room full of kindling.
- A war sold on the promise of weeks has stretched into months, with Iran striking U.S. bases, energy infrastructure, and civilian sites across the Gulf — including Qatar itself.
- The former Qatari PM's accusation that Netanyahu manipulated successive U.S. administrations over three decades has injected a volatile charge of deliberate deception into an already combustible regional moment.
- Gaza remains at the center of a parallel catastrophe, with allegations of a coordinated effort to depopulate the enclave adding a humanitarian emergency to the strategic one.
- Gulf states, long sheltered beneath the American security umbrella, are now confronting the unsettling possibility that Washington's attention — and commitment — is drifting toward Asia.
- Al Thani's proposal for a Gulf-led military alliance anchored by Saudi Arabia signals that the region is beginning to imagine a future it must build for itself, with or without Washington.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, Qatar's former prime minister and foreign minister, recently told Al Jazeera that Israel spent three decades systematically pressuring the United States to go to war with Iran — and that the campaign ultimately succeeded through a false promise. According to Al Thani, Prime Minister Netanyahu convinced Washington that military action would be swift and decisive, producing regime collapse within weeks. The comparison he offered was to the capture of Venezuela's Maduro — a clean, contained operation. What followed was neither clean nor contained.
The campaign launched on February 28 has since triggered Iranian retaliatory strikes on U.S. military installations, energy infrastructure, and civilian targets across the Gulf. Qatar itself has been hit. Al Thani condemned those strikes while acknowledging a geographic and political reality: Iran is a neighbor, and coexistence is not a choice the Gulf states can simply opt out of. He portrayed Netanyahu as the conflict's primary architect and beneficiary, pursuing what Al Thani described as a vision of territorial expansion that would redraw the map of the Middle East.
On Gaza, Al Thani was direct and unsparing — calling Israel's campaign there genocidal and alleging that intelligence points to a deliberate effort to empty the territory of its Palestinian population. He argued that any path forward must include a credible political horizon for Palestinian statehood, and praised Saudi Arabia for refusing normalization without one.
Looking ahead, Al Thani warned that the Gulf can no longer assume American protection as a permanent condition. With Washington pivoting toward Asia, he called for the creation of a regional military alliance — a Gulf NATO, anchored by Saudi Arabia and supported by Turkey, Pakistan, and Egypt. The message carried the weight of a man who has watched the old order strain and crack: the region must now learn to secure itself, before the illusion of a short war gives way to something far harder to undo.
Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani, who served as Qatar's prime minister and foreign minister, sat down recently with Al Jazeera to make a stark claim: Israel has spent three decades methodically pushing the United States toward war with Iran, and it finally succeeded by convincing Washington of something that turned out to be false.
According to Al Thani, hardline Israeli leaders—particularly Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—have pressured successive American administrations since the 1990s to attack Iran over its nuclear program. Previous presidents resisted. Trump's first administration, Al Thani said, was reluctant to launch a full-scale conflict. But Netanyahu, he argued, eventually prevailed by selling the U.S. government an illusion: that a war with Iran would be swift, decisive, and result in the regime's collapse within weeks. The comparison Al Thani drew was to the U.S. capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro—a quick, clean operation. That was the promise. That was not what happened.
The military campaign began on February 28. Since then, Iran has retaliated with strikes across the Gulf region, hitting U.S. military bases, energy infrastructure, and civilian sites. Qatar itself has been struck. These attacks have raised the specter of a broader regional war, the kind that destabilizes not just one country but an entire part of the world. Al Thani condemned Iran's strikes on civilian and industrial targets, but he also acknowledged a hard reality: Iran is geographically close to the Gulf states. Coexistence is not optional.
Al Thani painted Netanyahu as the primary beneficiary of the conflict, using the war to reshape the region and advance what he called a vision for a "Greater Israel" with expanded borders—a territorial ambition that some analysts describe as stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates, encompassing parts of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and the Gulf. He also emphasized that America's true strength has historically been its capacity to avoid military force, not its ability to deploy it.
On Gaza, Al Thani was unsparing. He described Israel's military campaign there as genocidal and claimed intelligence shows Israel is working to depopulate the enclave by encouraging Palestinians to leave. He insisted that any discussion of disarming Hamas must be tied to a political roadmap for an independent Palestinian state. He praised Saudi Arabia for refusing to normalize relations with Israel without such a roadmap, saying that stance has disrupted Netanyahu's regional calculations.
Looking forward, Al Thani warned that Gulf states cannot rely indefinitely on the American security umbrella. Washington is shifting its strategic focus toward Asia and China. The decades-old deterrence provided by U.S. bases in the Gulf is becoming less certain. In response, he proposed the creation of a "Gulf NATO"—a regionally led military alliance with Saudi Arabia as its backbone, supplemented by partnerships with Turkey, Pakistan, and Egypt. The message was clear: the Gulf must learn to defend itself.
Civilians in Gaza and Iran continue to absorb the violence. The international community faces mounting pressure to intervene before the region descends into what Al Thani called irreversible chaos. The question now is whether the illusion that started this war—that it would be short and decisive—will finally give way to a reckoning about what comes next.
Citas Notables
Netanyahu convinced the U.S. administration that the war would be short and swift, and that the Iranian regime would fall within weeks— Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani
Disunity among Gulf nations poses a greater threat than Iran, Israel, or foreign military bases in the region— Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al Thani
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
When Al Thani says Netanyahu sold Washington an "illusion," what exactly does he mean was false about it?
He means the promise that Iran would collapse quickly, that the regime would fall in weeks. That was the sales pitch to American decision-makers. The reality has been Iranian retaliation, strikes on bases and infrastructure, and no quick resolution.
But why would Netanyahu have that kind of influence over U.S. foreign policy in the first place?
That's the deeper question Al Thani is raising. He's saying this pressure has been consistent for thirty years, across multiple administrations. At some point, the pressure worked. Whether that's because of lobbying, shared strategic interests, or something else, he's suggesting the influence was real and sustained.
He mentions a "Greater Israel" stretching to the Euphrates. Is that an actual stated goal, or is he interpreting Israeli actions?
He's interpreting Israeli actions and territorial ambitions as pointing toward that vision. It's not something Netanyahu has announced publicly. But Al Thani is reading the current war as part of a larger reshaping of the region's borders and power.
What does a "Gulf NATO" actually mean in practice?
It means the Gulf states—led by Saudi Arabia—forming their own military alliance independent of U.S. security guarantees. They'd partner with regional powers like Turkey, Pakistan, and Egypt instead of relying on American bases for deterrence.
Why is that necessary if the U.S. is still present in the region?
Because the U.S. is turning its attention to Asia and China. Al Thani is saying the American security umbrella is becoming less reliable. The Gulf states need to prepare for a future where they can't count on Washington the way they have for decades.
And on Gaza—he ties disarming Hamas to Palestinian statehood. Why is that connection important to him?
Because without a political solution, disarming Hamas is just military victory without resolution. He's saying you can't separate the military question from the political one. Saudi Arabia's refusal to normalize with Israel without a Palestinian state is, in his view, the only leverage that matters.