With the Paris Olympics in full swing, it seems an appropriate time to read the story of Alfred “Artem” Nakache, an Algerian-born Jew who came to Paris in the 1930s to pursue his promising career as a swimmer. Sarah Abrevaya Stein writes:

Between 1935 and 1938, [Nakache] earned seven French national titles, and between 1941 and 1942, six more. During this period, Nakache represented France and Morocco at the Second Maccabiah Games in Tel Aviv in 1935 in the 100-meter freestyle and water polo, respectively. At the notorious 1936 Summer Olympics, in swastika-draped Berlin, Nakache helped France take fourth in the 4×200-meter relay. . . . A show of force in 1936 Berlin felt like a political triumph to athletes deemed “subhuman” by the Nazis, and Nakache’s later remarks suggest that he was among them.

In the years that followed, he won the freestyle on the French national stage a staggering six times and the breaststroke four times. In July 1941, he set a world record (the first by a French swimmer) in a long seawater course in Marseilles. The record stood for five years.

Nakache enlisted in the French army in 1939, and after France fell to the Nazis his star status protected him and his family for a time; he was still competing publicly (while secretly aiding the resistance) while thousands of French Jews were being sent to Auschwitz. But near the end of 1942 he met the same fate. He survived, although his wife and young daughter did not:

In 1948 Nakache swam for the French team, the first Holocaust survivor to earn a place on an Olympic team and one of only two to ever do so. In the London Summer Games, Nakache reached the semifinals in the 200-meter breaststroke and played on France’s water-polo team, which placed sixth. (In 1956, Ben Helfgott, a Jewish weightlifter from Poland and a survivor of Buchenwald and Theresienstadt, competed for Great Britain.)

Small in area and population and rich in natural gas, Qatar plays an outsize role in the Middle East. While its support keeps Hamas in business, it also has vital relations with Israel that are much better than those enjoyed by many other Arab countries. Doha’s relationship with Washington, though more complex, isn’t so different. Yoel Guzansky offers a comprehensive examination of Israel’s Qatar dilemma:

At first glance, Qatar’s foreign policy seems filled with contradictions. Since 1995, it has pursued a strategy of diplomatic hedging—building relationships with multiple, often competing, actors. Qatar’s vast wealth and close ties with the United States have enabled it to maneuver independently on the international stage, maintaining relations with rival factions, including those that are direct adversaries.

Qatar plays an active role in international diplomacy, engaging in conflict mediation in over twenty regions worldwide. While not all of its mediation efforts have been successful, they have helped boost its international prestige, which it considers vital for its survival among larger and more powerful neighbors. Qatar has participated in mediation efforts in Venezuela, Lebanon, Iran, Afghanistan, and other conflict zones, reinforcing its image as a neutral broker.

Israel’s stated objective of removing Hamas from power in Gaza is fundamentally at odds with Qatar’s interest in keeping Hamas as the governing force. In theory, if the Israeli hostages would to be released, Israel could break free from its dependence on Qatari mediation. However, it is likely that even after such a development, Qatar will continue positioning itself as a mediator—particularly in enforcing agreements and shaping Gaza’s reconstruction efforts.

Qatar’s position is strengthened further by its good relations with the U.S. Yet, Guzansky notes, it has weaknesses as well that Israel could exploit:

Qatar is highly sensitive to its global image and prides itself on maintaining a neutral diplomatic posture. If Israel chooses to undermine Qatar’s reputation, it could target specific aspects of Qatari activity that are problematic from an Israeli perspective.