In the aftermath of Israel’s strike aimed at Hamas leaders in Qatar, questions have emerged about how much the U.S. knew, the extent of President Donald Trump’s frustration with Israel’s actions, and what it means for the U.S.-Israel relationship.

But another important question is whether the strike marks a turning point for Qatar — and whether the Gulf nation may now be considering a shift in its own role and behavior. 

The fact that the Trump administration has not dwelled on the attack — even sending Secretary of State Marco Rubio to Israel for a warm visit days after the strike — may give Doha pause. While Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the strike “did not advance Israel or America’s goals,” in the next breath, she said that “eliminating Hamas, who have profited off the misery of those living in Gaza, is a worthy goal.” That goes against the Qataris’ preferred narrative, that the U.S. wants it to host terrorists because they’re the only conduit to Hamas, the Taliban and others.

With that in mind, Qatar could reconsider the business of harboring terrorists, because it has become too risky. Though the UAE was not in the terror-supporting business and has long opposed the Muslim Brotherhood, it didn’t prevent people like Hamas terrorist Mahmoud al-Mabhouh from visiting the UAE until the Mossad killed him in Dubai in 2010. The Emiratis publicly railed against Israel and the then-quiet relations between the countries were set back, but the UAE cracked down and banned such individuals associated with terror groups from entering their country.

However, Qatar does not seem to be taking recent events as a signal to change. Doha roundly condemned Israel, threatened to stop mediating hostage talks and convened an Arab summit to condemn Israel further. Senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad appeared on Al Jazeera yesterday, with the chyron stating that he was in Doha, and the wife of senior Hamas official Khalil al-Haya was spotted visiting the grave of her son, killed in the strike, with Qatari security. On Tuesday, the Qatari Defense Minister hosted his Taliban counterpart.

And while Qatar could respond to the strike by turning away from America, it does not seem to have done that, either. Doha publicly denied reports that they were reconsidering its relationship with Washington. After its initial statement, Qatar said it would continue mediating Gaza hostage and ceasefire talks, and shifted to blaming Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, rather than Israel, broadly. Doha softened its language in Arabic to describe the hostages, moving from “prisoners” to “captives,” according to Ariel Admoni, a Qatar expert at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security (JISS).

Admoni said that Doha’s “two-faced strategy has survived. … They are trying to keep up their Islamist and American ties. They can do both, and it pays for them.”

While the U.S. did not stop the Israeli strike, “no one is suggesting that Qatar expel Hamas,” Admoni noted. “Qatar is getting the legitimacy to continue hosting Hamas. It doesn’t look like Qatari public gestures to Hamas anger America.” 

Rubio publicly praised Doha and asked it to continue playing a role in mediating between Hamas and Israel, and other administration figures have continued calling Qatar a great ally.

For the Doha strike to truly represent a crossroads for Qatar, at which it will have to choose between continuing to harbor terrorists or deepening its economic ties with the West, real pressure must be applied. Barring that, and with the Trump administration seemingly eager to stay in Doha’s good graces, Qatar has little incentive to change.

Asked on the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy’s “Mideast Horizons” podcast this week why the U.S. doesn’t put more pressure on Qatar, Richard Goldberg, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ senior advisor and a former Trump administration official, said that “despite bad actions, [Qatar] host[s] a major artery of the U.S. military in Al-Udeid Air Base … You could say, why do we have one of the most important bases right across the Persian Gulf from Iran and within missile range? Maybe we shouldn’t have critical assets right there … But the Pentagon doesn’t think that way. This is just how they do business and it would be too hard to think about something else — and [they say Qatar] are great partners for hosting us.”

Calling Qatar “a gas station with a television station,” Goldberg, who was the Trump administration’s National Energy Dominance Council’s senior counselor, noted that Qatari dominance in the natural gas market is also a factor in which there is “interdependence, but also a competition.” The fact that the U.S. is “a competitor with the Qataris [is] a dynamic that has not been explored enough by the Trump administration. The president wants to make America energy dominant,” he added.

Goldberg also noted that some members of the administration — who he did not name but include Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff — worked with Qatar before working for the Trump administration: “I don’t even think that they agree with the Qataris hosting Hamas or sponsoring Hamas, and I think they would probably, at some point, indict the Hamas people … but when you’re in the private sector and this isn’t your No. 1 thing,” you’re willing to take their money. South Carolina, home of hawkish Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), is “hugely economically reliant on Qatar. … There’s a reason they picked South Carolina” for investments.

These are all part of Qatar’s “very sophisticated” moves, he said, to build an “influence network … and how they become insulated,” even as they continue to host Hamas.