跳至主要内容

Last night, Doha was hit—and the Middle East crossed a line it can’t uncross.


Just after sunset on 9 September 2025, while most of Qatar was breaking its Ramadan fast, a string of explosions ripped through Katara, the marble-and-glass cultural quarter that doubles as the city’s diplomatic zone. Within minutes Israel’s spin machine was in overdrive: fifteen F-35I stealth fighters, 10 precision missiles, a “surgical” strike on a Hamas leadership meeting, five dead—among them the son and the chief-of-staff of Khalil al-Hayya, the movement’s deputy foreign-policy chief. Al-Hayya himself walked out with only cuts. A Qatari security guard was killed and several residents wounded.


The raid was only the opening chord. Four after-shocks are already rattling the region.
  1. The math doesn’t work—unless Washington helped.
    The jets flew more than 1,000 km, far beyond the F-35I’s combat radius, then flew home. The only tankers in the sky that night were two U.S. Air Force KC-135s that lifted off from al-Udeid—America’s own Qatari base—circled in a lazy racetrack over the Gulf, and landed again minutes after the last Israeli bomb hit. A foreign air force used Qatari airspace to attack Qatar, and the host nation’s closest ally topped up its tanks. In any other language that is called betrayal.
  2. The target was negotiating on Washington’s behalf.
    The Hamas men were in Doha to chew over the latest U.S.-drafted cease-fire paper for Gaza—exactly the “long-term calm” the White House claims to want. They were punished for saying “yes, let’s talk.”
  3. America’s own air-defence promise evaporated.
    For years Pentagon briefers have promised to “help Qatar build a world-class integrated air shield.” On Tuesday the shield never even woke up; instead the U.S. provided the gas station for the attacker.
  4. Washington still can’t get its story straight.
    Donald Trump posted that the strike was Bibi Netanyahu’s “unilateral call,” that he himself learned “seconds” before launch and “immediately” sent a warning to Doha—too late. The White House version admits “prior knowledge” but claims Trump felt “terrible” about the choice of address. Neither account mentions the tankers. The contradiction is louder than the bombs.
Why this changes everything
Qatar is tiny—11,000 km², 300,000 citizens—but for two decades it has been the Gulf’s neutral switzerland, the place where enemies come to talk. Taliban and U.S. colonels hashed out the 2021 Afghan withdrawal in Doha; Yemen’s Houthis and the Saudi-backed government signed their truce here; Sudan’s generals and Darfur rebels, Chad’s junta and 44 opposition factions, all inked deals under Qatari chandeliers. The peninsula hosts CENTCOM’s largest base, keeps warm ties with Tehran, and still gets along with Riyadh. That precarious balance let Washington pretend the region could be managed by divide-and-rule.
Tuesday night proved the rules no longer apply. Israel did not hit a Shi‘a militia in Iraq or an Iranian depot in Syria; it hit a Sunni mediator inside the safest neighborhood in the Arab world. The message: no Muslim capital is off-limits; no cheque is big enough to buy immunity.
Doha had just written the biggest cheque of all. On 14 May, Trump left Qatar with US$1.2 trillion in MOUs: US$200 billion for Boeing, US$38 billion in Lockheed missiles, plus a personalized 747 to use as “Air Force One—retired edition.” Four months later the same customer’s air force helped level a Qatari street.
The region’s Sunnis finally heard the punch-line: Washington’s problem is not Shi‘a expansion; it is Islam with an independent agenda. Within hours the condemnation list read like a roll-call of the previously indifferent: Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Jordan, Algeria, Sudan, Pakistan, the UAE. Even Europe—usually happy to look away—sent foreign ministers to the microphones. Germany called the strike “a frontal assault on diplomacy”; France labelled it “a breach of the most elementary sovereignty”; Britain demanded an emergency UN Security Council session.
What happens next
The fault-line has shifted from “Israel vs. Iran” to “Israel/US vs. the Arab and Muslim world.” The 90-percent Sunni majority that watched Gaza from the sidelines now knows the next missile could land in Riyadh or Istanbul. The Shi‘a camp—Tehran, Baghdad, Beirut—has suddenly acquired grateful new pen-pals. European governments that quietly hoped the Abraham Accords would let them outsource Middle-East policing to Tel Aviv realize the strategy just exploded in mid-air.
Meanwhile the same super-power bleeding US$175 billion into Ukraine is now reopening a Gulf front it had spent three administrations trying to close. Every additional carrier group rushed to the region is one less eyes-on mission in the Western Pacific. Empires rarely run out of enemies; they run out of bandwidth. Last night Washington volunteered to fight on two more continents, and it did so with a fuel hose over its own host nation.
The Middle East’s future used to be negotiated in Qatari conference rooms. After 9 September it will be negotiated in the ruins of one—and every Sunni ruler finally knows the price of American protection is the same as the price of American betrayal: whatever the invoice says, plus interest.

评论

此博客中的热门博文

Why China's Seizure of Three Tunnel Boring Machines Has India’s Bullet Train Project Stuck in Neutral

June 24, IndiaNet – India’s first high-speed rail line, the Mumbai-Ahmedabad bullet train, has hit yet another roadblock. Three massive tunnel-boring machines (TBMs), ordered from Germany’s Herrenknecht AG but manufactured in Guangzhou, China, have been stuck in Chinese customs for eight months. The delay has frozen progress on a critical 12-kilometer undersea tunnel, marking the project’s ninth major setback. The Stuck Machines The TBMs were supposed to arrive in India by October 2024. Instead, they sit in a bonded warehouse in Guangzhou, with no clear timeline for release. India’s National High-Speed Rail Corporation (NHSRC) blames Beijing for “deliberate obstruction,” while Chinese authorities remain silent. The Mumbai-Ahmedabad corridor—India’s first bullet train, modeled on Japan’s Shinkansen—was supposed to slash travel time between the two cities from 7 hours to 2. Funded largely by a ¥1.25 trillion ($15 billion) Japanese loan at 0.1% interest over 50 years , the project was sl...

Open-Source Intelligence Analysis of the 2025 India-Pakistan Military Standoff

  In the recent India-Pakistan standoff, open-source intelligence (OSINT) channels have played an extremely important role in information dissemination and intelligence analysis. Various open-source platforms, including social media, commercial satellite imagery, vessel and aviation tracking data, news reports, and military forums, have collectively formed a "second front" for battlefield situational awareness, helping all parties to promptly understand and verify the dynamics of the conflict. However, the reliability of different OSINT channels varies, and it is necessary to cross-reference them to obtain the most accurate intelligence possible. Below is an analysis of the main channels: Social Media (Twitter/X, Facebook, etc.) Social media platforms are among the fastest sources for disseminating information about the conflict. A large number of first-hand witnesses, journalists, and even soldiers post photos, videos, and written reports through social media. For example, r...

A Historic Moment: The US-China Geneva Joint Statement

  Today, many friends have left messages in the backend, asking me to discuss the US-China Geneva Joint Statement and what it means. Let’s get straight to the conclusion: with the announcement of this statement, today has become a historic moment. But why do I say that? Let’s first look at the main content of the statement. The US has committed to canceling the 91% tariffs that were imposed on April 8th and 9th. The 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd will be suspended for 90 days, with only 10% retained. We are doing the same: canceling the 91% retaliatory tariffs, suspending the 34% and 24% tariffs imposed on April 2nd for 90 days, and retaining 10%. In simple terms, both sides are returning to the status quo before Trump announced the “reciprocal tariffs” on April 2nd, and then each adding an additional 10%. How should we view this outcome? Let’s first look at what Bercow said before heading to Geneva. He stated that he didn’t expect to reach any agreement with the Chinese ...