SINGAPORE: On Tuesday (Sep 9), Israel launched a brazen attack on Qatari soil in broad daylight, targeting senior Hamas leaders based in Doha – an assault that added to the growing concern in the Middle East that Israel pays no heed to red lines.

Israel’s audacious strike on an Arab capital – one designated a major non-NATO ally of the United States, at that – should be viewed in a broader context: Through the lenses of annexation plans and the shredding of peace negotiations.

The attack, combined with Tel Aviv’s decision to occupy Gaza City, and to go as far as holding discussions on annexing the West Bank, represents a shift in how it perceives the conditions for a peace agreement with Hamas. It previously relied on truces and exchanging Palestinian prisoners for hostages while regrouping before resuming attacks, notably the two-month ceasefire broken by Israeli airstrikes on Mar 18.

Now, it has set out maximalist conditions, demanding nothing less than the release of all hostages and the complete surrender and disarmament of Hamas, while using military force at will anywhere in the region. This indicates that Israel refuses to negotiate in good faith, and has a complete disregard for the chief mediator in its conflict with Hamas – none other than Qatar. Government spokesman David Mencer told the BBC that with a “plan for the future of Gaza”, Tel Aviv is not interested in “partial deals”.

By carrying out an attack on Qatari soil, it is questionable if Israel has an interest in any sort of deal.

Hamas, meanwhile, has gone the other way. It accepted a temporary ceasefire and limited hostage deal on Aug 18 – a version strikingly similar to an American proposal in July. This was a marked change from its stance in April, when it said it would “no longer agree to interim deals”, and demanded a comprehensive arrangement instead.

Washington recently joined the clamour by issuing an ultimatum to the Palestinian group: Accept a new American proposal, or face an Israeli invasion. President Donald Trump’s “final warning” landed just before the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) was due to convene on Sep 9. The presumed targets of the Israeli strike had reportedly gathered for discussions on precisely this.

The end result is that both Israel and Hamas are now further from a deal than ever, and another round of bloody fighting will ensue in Gaza City. Worse, all signs are pointing to Israel’s intention of shredding the idea and practicality of a Palestinian state.

THE ISRAELI BULLDOZER

Despite mounting international and domestic pressure, the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to set its sights on eliminating its adversaries, while placating right-wing elements that keep him in power.

Israeli airstrikes recently killed the prime minister of the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen, while continuing its assault on South Lebanon even as the US called for Israeli restraint. As Tel Aviv pushes ahead with its military offensive on Gaza City, protests have erupted at home demanding an end to the war, including from many reservists who have refused to comply with mobilisation orders.

Meanwhile, Israel is not even cloaking its desire for a land grab. Mr Netanyahu’s government is already considering annexation options on the West Bank – Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich’s proposal to take over 82 per cent of the territory among them – while subjecting the Gaza Strip to famine. Mr Smotrich’s idea runs in tandem with the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, in addition to settler violence, which he said would “bury the idea of a Palestinian state”.

This is despite the growing momentum by various countries in Europe and beyond to recognise a Palestinian state. With France leading the charge, having co-chaired a UN conference on the Two-State Solution with Saudi Arabia in late July, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and Belgium have announced their intention to recognise Palestinian statehood at the UNGA.

Meanwhile, the United Arab Emirates, one of the signatories to the Abraham Accords, issued a rebuke saying annexation is a “red line” that would “end the pursuit of regional integration”. These words have reportedly led to Israel having second thoughts.

But the fact is that Israel is now negotiating from a position of strength, with little regard for international opinion. Its strike on Qatar, regardless of its objectives, and at a time when a large part of the discussions at the UNGA are expected to centre around Gaza, demonstrates Israel’s disregard for norms.

INTERNATIONAL CONVERGENCE MEETS AMERICAN SPOILER

Given Hamas’ weakness and its unpopularity, the reality is that Israel looks likely to muscle its way into re-occupying Gaza 20 years after it had disengaged from the Strip.

Mr Netanyahu has also been belligerent in confronting countries that have promised to recognise a Palestinian state, or have been critical of its military actions in Gaza. In the latest episode, Spain was accused of anti-Semitism after Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez announced a series of measures to pile more pressure on Israel.

The reality is that the only power with the ability to restrain Israel is the United States.

But the resurfacing of Mr Trump’s vision of a “Gaza Riviera” – first touted in March – is a worrying sign. Now dubbed the Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust (or “Great Trust”), the proposal envisages “voluntary” relocation of Gaza’s population in exchange for digital tokens, six to eight “AI-powered smart cities”, and a manufacturing zone named after billionaire Elon Musk.

The latest wrinkle is whether Mr Trump gave tacit approval for Mr Netanyahu to execute the strike on Qatar. The US claims it was notified only after Israeli missiles were on their way, and Mr Trump said the attack served neither Israel’s, nor the US’, interests. At the same time, he called “eliminating Hamas” a “worthy goal” – never mind if it involved an assault in the capital of a close US ally.

Either scenario – the US turning a blind eye, or Israel acting without consulting its main benefactor – will mean that the UNGA will do little to reverse the current situation, despite the growing groundswell of support for recognition of Palestinian statehood. Senior Palestinian officials, including President Mahmoud Abbas, have also been blocked by the US State Department from obtaining visas.

It is thus likely that any move to draft a UN Security Council resolution on a permanent ceasefire as a precursor to a two-state solution, will likely lead to a veto from Washington (again). That will leave Gazans and those in the West Bank with a question they have asked all too often in the past: Will anything change?