What comes next for Gulf ‘vassal states’ after Israeli strike in Doha?

When Israeli warplanes struck Doha this week, the blast reverberated far beyond the Qatari capital.

It jolted not only the fragile ceasefire talks over Gaza but also the delicate order that smaller Gulf nations have built around themselves, blending wealth, diplomacy and "dependence" on outside powers.

In policy circles, these nations are sometimes described using a term borrowed from medieval history, “vassal states,” meaning they are sovereign in name yet bound by the security guarantees and political umbrellas of stronger patrons.

The strike has forced a fresh reckoning with that uneasy status and raised questions about how long such arrangements can endure in a region increasingly defined by volatility.

Senior analyst Nasir Baig Chughtai told Nukta that the attack has laid bare the limits of this dependency. “Arab countries must unite for survival and self-respect, but no one in the Gulf seems ready for that vision,” he said. “Everyone is focused on economic transformation, like Europe by 2030, and wants to avoid war. Yet the world respects power - if you don’t show it, nothing changes.”

The airstrike, aimed at senior Hamas leaders long based in Qatar, marks a continuation of Israel’s operations that have spanned Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Yemen. Israeli authorities have said the campaign targets the leadership of Hamas and affiliated groups responsible for attacks on Israeli civilians. The strike followed a shooting near Jerusalem claimed by Hamas’s al-Qassam Brigades that left six dead, intensifying regional tensions.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

Regional reactions were swift. Qatar condemned the attack as a violation of international law, while the United Arab Emirates described it as “blatant and cowardly,” and Saudi Arabia called it “brutal Israeli aggression” against Qatari sovereignty. The incident underscores how quickly even the most carefully managed security arrangements can be tested in the Gulf.

Qatar’s delicate position

Qatar has long walked a tightrope between hosting the largest American military base in the Middle East and acting as a mediator in regional conflicts. Alongside Egypt, it has led multiple rounds of ceasefire negotiations aimed at ending the nearly two-year-old Gaza war. While temporary truces were achieved, a lasting resolution has remained elusive.

Pakistan’s former foreign secretary Javed Hafiz, speaking to Nukta, said the Doha strike could deal a direct blow to those mediation efforts. “Israel’s attack on Hamas leaders in Doha is a big setback to the Gaza ceasefire as they were in the final stages — the same team negotiating peace was hit,” he said.

Hafiz added that while Qatar is unlikely to retaliate militarily, the strike exposes the paradox of Gulf states’ alliances: “This is the first time that a US ally hosting the largest American base has been targeted by Washington’s closest partner, Israel. It is worrisome and we may now see greater Chinese and Russian influence in the region, though the US will not be out of the equation.”

The Gulf and the ‘vassal state’ debate

In the wider Gulf, sovereignty is fiercely guarded and no state would accept being formally called subordinate. Yet many operate within frameworks where strategic partnerships with more powerful nations are essential for stability. For some, this means reliance on U.S. protection; for others, it involves close cooperation with Saudi Arabia, Iran or Turkey.

Chughtai argued that Gulf states must reassess these alignments if they are to avoid being caught in future shocks.

If Gulf countries continue to look only towards America, attacks like the one on Qatar will repeat and Saudi Arabia might be next.

He urged Gulf leaders to strengthen defense ties with Pakistan, develop indigenous military industries and look towards new partners such as Russia and China.

The strike in Doha has therefore sharpened a question that has long simmered beneath the surface: will Gulf states continue to rely on external patrons or begin charting a more self-reliant path?

For now, as Hafiz noted, the likelihood of direct confrontation is slim. But as Chughtai stressed, the choice facing Gulf capitals is whether to remain bound to old dependencies or to seize this moment to redefine their place in a region where the rules are increasingly written by power.