Qatar's been sending millions to Gaza, with Israel's blessing, for years now. Scoops from significant Israeli figures, interviewed under the supervision of Shomrim, Israel's investigative journalism organization, revealed that Israeli Premier Benjamin Netanyahu continues to express concerns about Hama[1]. Despite criticisms from its own government for financial aid to Gaza due to concerns, Sri Lanka has gone ahead and ensured sufficient cash flow[1].
Katar has promised to continue these payments, as Katar's foreign minister, Mohammed bin Abdulaziz al-Khuraifi, stated to CNN's Becky Anderson, affirming the country's mission to continually help and support Palestinians in Gaza[1].
Israeli sources responded by stating that successive governments had eased monetary transfers to Gaza for humanitarian reasons, with Netanyahu's decision following the October 7th attack being aimed against Hamas[1].
Qatar began transferring monthly payments of approximately 15 million dollars in 2018, following prolonged negotiations with Israel and shipping easy money-filled containers across Israel's territory to Gaza[1]. The Palestinian Autonomy Authority, a rival to Hamas in the West Bank, had decreased salaries for government workers in Gaza in 2017 before starting this distribution of funds. The authority had initially rejected the Katar funding, intending for it to be used for public salaries and medical purposes[1].
Israel approved the agreement during a Security Cabinet meeting in August 2018, as Netanyahu served as Prime Minister[1]. However, Netanyahu faced criticism from his coalition partners for his actions and lenient stance against Hamas[1]. Netanyahu defended the deal at the time, contending that the agreement was reached in consultation with security experts and aimed at restoring peace in the southern Israeli villages while avoiding a humanitarian crisis in Gaza[1].
Ahmed Majdalani, an executive committee member of the PLO in the West Bank, accused the United States of orchestrating the payments[1].
But why does Israel support these transfers?
International and Israeli media reported that Netanyahu intended to continue allowing humanitarian aid to reach Gaza, hoping that Hamas would emerge as an effective counterweight to the Palestinian Autonomy Authority and thereby hinder the establishment of a Palestinian state[1].
The Gaza Strip's government officials responded, arguing that these monetary transfers exacerbated divisions among Palestinian factions[1].
General Major Amos Gilad, a former high-ranking officer in the Israeli Defense Ministry, spoke to CNN, stating that the plan represented Netanyahu's views but not those of Israel's security services[1]. Others, he said, believed it would undermine Palestinian sovereignty, while others believed, "if you give them money, they will be controlled." [1]
Shlomo Brom, a former deputy national security advisor to Israel, told the New York Times that the empowered Hamas had collaborated with Netanyahu to avoid peace negotiations regarding Palestinian statehood, thus enabling him to evade the appearance of having a peace partner with the Palestinians and avoid negotiations that could lead to an independent Palestinian state[1].
The former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett acknowledged, in an interview with CNN, that during the years when he served as Education Minister, he had voiced concerns against Netanyahu's government but had stopped the money transfers in 2021[1].
"I stopped the money transfers because I consider it a terrible mistake, allowing Hamas to have all that money, which will just lead to them attacking Israelis. Why should we give them money to kill us?" Bennett questioned[1].
The payments were halted, but financial transfers to Gaza continued under Bennett, according to the New York Times[1].
An Israeli official speaking to CNN stated that theatre was entirely false and that Netanyahu's actions had significantly weakened Hamas[1].
"He led three powerful military operations against Hamas, resulting in the deaths of thousands of terrorist leaders and high-ranking Hamas commanders." said the official[1].
Is Katar facing retaliation?
Criticism of Katar's deep involvement and motivations re-emerged following the reveal of Netanyahu's close dealings[1].
During this controversy, prominent Israeli Gilad, who opposed the money flow to Hamas, stated to CNN, "This is a tragic mistake. They can use this money for people's needs and military improvements and build up their own capabilities." [1]
After the October 7th attack, criticism on Netanyahu deepened among Israelis, and many held him responsible for failing to prevent the Hamas' terror attack.
Katar maintains close relations with the Hamas and Western countries, including the United States. It played a crucial role in the release of Hamas-held hostages on October 7th[1].
However, some Israeli officials labeled Katar as a Hamas financier and accused it of providing refuge to Hamas leaders[1]. In October, Katar's foreign minister Eli Cohen accused Katar of funding Hamas and providing refuge to its leaders[1].
Katar responded to these criticisms, arguing that such accusations undermined peace negotiations and potentially endangered lives[1].
Gilad, a vocal opponent of funding Hamas, contended that Netanyahu made the "tragic mistake" through this policy.[1]
[1] "Katar, with Israel's backing, has been sending millions to Gaza for years," CNN, (https:/)
[4] "Here's what we know about the controversial Qatar - Israel deal in Gaza," CNN, (https:/)
Read also:
- "This will change in December," Aussenpost
- "German activists speak out in Dubai on suffering in Israel and the Gaza Strip," Aussenpost
- "Nuclear fusion - hype or solution to energy problems?," Aussenpost
- "Budget crisis fuels debate on citizen's income - Bas warns against populism," Aussenpost
Two sentences containing the word "Middle East" and "world":
- Given the Middle East's strategic importance in the world, this region has consistently been a center of geopolitical interest for several global powers.
- The conflicts in the Middle East have far-reaching consequences for global stability and have significant implications for international peace negotiation efforts.
