On September 11, 2025, the UN Security Council held an emergency meeting in New York to discuss Israel’s strike on the Qatari capital, Doha, issuing a statement that condemned the assault on Qatar’s sovereignty without naming the perpetrator.
The attack raises grave questions around international relations. Is a statement issued in New York enough to deter future attacks by Tel Aviv? This question is at the crux of the diplomatic crisis precipitated by the Israeli assault on Qatar, which has been a crucial back channel for many parties, including Washington and Tel Aviv, and has been playing a vital role in the effort to resolve sensitive crises such as a Gaza ceasefire, ending famine, and the exchange of prisoners.
It was a grave moment because not only were people or buildings targeted, the infrastructure of mediation - the framework of resolving international conflicts through dialogue - was the ultimate target. In its statement on September 12, the Security Council condemned the attack, affirmed support for Qatar’s sovereignty, and raised the alarm against escalation.
That statement reflects international recognition that a member state’s sovereignty had been violated. While it does apply some political pressure, it also highlights the limits of conventional statements’ capacity to deter a powerful state that enjoys full US support. Real deterrence requires tools: economic sanctions, direct political intervention, and international monitoring arrangements. Statements are not enough.
Today, the Arab-Islamic Doha Summit will begin. This summit is a practical step that will support Qatar and reinforce the ability of mediating states to safeguard back channels of diplomacy, raising the response from the Security Council to the level required.
Synergizing the Security Council’s stance with the steps of the regional summit creates a dual deterrent, as it combines international legitimacy and material regional support, which would make future attacks extremely politically and diplomatically risky, forcing Israel to think twice before undertaking a similar rogue act.
History offers important lessons for those of us developing frameworks to reinforce deterrence and safeguard mediation. During the 1990s, multinational monitoring arrangements were made to safeguard talks between the armed forces and local militias in Colombia. This effort helped protect peace negotiations between the government and FARC, as any attempt to target negotiators would lead to immediate financial and political sanctions, forcing both parties to think twice before perpetrating such a crime.
In Europe, during the negotiations of the late 1990s in Bosnia, the deployment of multinational monitoring forces and the proactive role played by the UN contributed to securing secret meetings, allowing dialogue to resume despite the ongoing threats.
In the Middle East, the Oslo process between Israel and the Palestinians showed that underpinning back channels with swift sanctions or the threat of diplomatic repercussions reinforced compliance and made the resumption of armed conflict less likely.
Applying these lessons to Qatar entails the development of multipronged mechanisms. First, international and regional monitoring arrangements must be reached to ensure that any attempt to target mediating offices is detected immediately. Second, security guarantees must be made to personnel and infrastructure; this would entail, among other steps, ensuring the presence of international monitors or neutral forces during sensitive meetings. Third, a rapid and effective sanctions multilateral program must be developed, so that financial and diplomatic measures are swiftly applied against any party that violates this norm, rendering such attacks extremely costly at both international and regional levels.
With these frameworks, Qatari mediation can be protected, and any future attack on Doha would entail consequences. Balancing international legitimacy with practical regional support, this approach shows that deterrence cannot come from statements alone. Allowing mediators to keep diplomatic channels open also requires concrete tools, swift sanctions, and effective monitoring mechanisms. We are confronting a rogue regional state; without serious deterrence, the genocide will continue and Israel will remain immune to consequences.
