Qatar’s Real Power Is Not Gas—It Is Narrative

Qatar’s immense financial power is rooted in its vast natural gas reserves. But energy wealth is not the emirate’s most formidable asset. Qatar’s true strategic advantage lies elsewhere: its ability to shape narratives through two influential media platforms, Al Jazeera and Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, and through a carefully cultivated ecosystem of intellectuals, research institutes, and diplomatic mediation.

Together, these tools allow Doha to project influence far beyond its size, presenting itself simultaneously as a champion of human rights, a neutral global mediator, and an indispensable interlocutor with actors the West struggles to engage.

At the center of this effort stands Azmi Bishara—an Arab intellectual, former member of Israel’s Knesset, and a figure who fled Israel ahead of an arrest on suspicion of cooperation with Hezbollah. Today, Bishara is among the most influential voices in Doha and a close adviser to Qatar’s emir, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani.

From his base in Qatar, Bishara oversees a sprawling network of research centers and media institutions funded by Qatari billions, with hubs in Doha, London, Washington—and within Arab society in Israel itself. Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, founded more than a decade ago in London, was designed as a counterweight to Al Jazeera: more liberal in tone, more secular, more intellectual in appearance. Yet its editorial line has remained consistently aligned with Qatari strategic interests.

This is the genius of the model. Qatar does not merely promote a political agenda; it wraps that agenda in the language of universal values—human rights, pluralism, anti-authoritarianism—thereby granting itself intellectual legitimacy in Western capitals and among progressive audiences. The result is a unique form of soft power: influence that does not look like influence.

At the same time, Qatar has entrenched itself as a global mediator. It brokers talks between Hamas and Israel. It has played a humanitarian role in negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, particularly regarding the return of Ukrainian children taken to Russia. It has mediated between Washington and Tehran on prisoner exchanges, and between the United States and Venezuela prior to the fall of Nicolás Maduro’s regime.

Each mediation reinforces Qatar’s image as indispensable. Each strengthens its claim to moral relevance. And each buys it political credit—often without meaningful scrutiny of its broader ideological goals.

Yet this benign image obscures a harder reality. Alongside mediation and media, Qatar has reportedly used financial incentives to cultivate allies and influence decision-makers across the globe. It would be naïve to assume that Israel—strategically important, politically divided, and institutionally strained—is immune to such efforts.

Recent revelations about Israelis allegedly working to advance Qatari narratives should set off alarm bells. Not primarily because of Qatar, but because of what these cases reveal about Israel’s internal weaknesses—especially the erosion of a strong, independent press.

Israeli democracy is not endangered by Doha, nor even by commentators who crossed ethical lines. It is endangered by a media ecosystem that no longer allows journalists to earn a dignified living. Advertising revenues have migrated to social media platforms, leaving traditional journalism financially hollowed out. In that vacuum, “easy money” becomes tempting—and Qatari money, in this context, is particularly effective.

If journalism is to remain relevant—and if democracy is to survive—it must find a sustainable business model that ensures independence and professionalism. At the same time, political leaders must be forced back into the arena of accountable, mediated public discourse: answering journalists’ questions, tolerating critical coverage, and respecting the role of a free press.

Qatar does not seek a formal pan-Arab union. Its ambition is subtler and far more effective: an Arab world that speaks in the idiom of Al Jazeera and Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, guided by Qatari capital and calibrated to Qatari interests. Influence without annexation. Power without fingerprints.

Israel, it increasingly appears, is a key target in this strategy. The danger is not that Qatar is acting cleverly—it is. The danger is that Israel is failing to protect the institutions that once knew how to resist such influence.