While Iran may be Hamas’s main provider of weapons, training, and strategic cooperation, Qatar gives it funds, a base of operations, and diplomatic cover. But yesterday, Tsachi Hanegbi—the Israeli national-security advisor and a Likud-party veteran—took to social media to praise Qatar as an “essential . . . stakeholder in the facilitation of humanitarian solutions,” a reference, at least in part, to Doha’s role in the release of four of Hamas’s hostages, and its attempts to negotiate the freeing of others. Hanegbi was quickly lambasted by the former prime minister Naftali Bennett. Benny Avni explains why:

The wealthy gas-producing Gulf country has long played a dual game, financing Hamas in Gaza and hosting the terrorist group’s top leaders, while claiming a peacemaker role. Qatar’s arsonist-and-fireman play is now culminating as it becomes key negotiator over the release of more than 220 Israeli hostages Hamas holds in Gaza.

For years, some $30 million in monthly cash transfers from Qatar mostly covered Hamas officials’ salaries. Each time it ran out of cash, Hamas would fire at Israel. The Qatari envoy to Gaza, Mohammed al-Emadi, would then drive to the Strip with suitcases filled with hundred-dollar bills. The bribes bought Israel calm—until the next rocket rounds.

That delicate dance ended with the horrific October 7 attack, which destroyed the Israeli illusion that Hamas’s genocidal goals, as explicitly expressed in its founding charter, could be moderated by Qatari development funds.

By only issuing . . . mild criticism of Qatar, Washington, [for its part], seems to be encouraging its diplomacy with regard to Hamas’s hostages. Yet, by releasing a small number of hostages at a time, Hamas is attempting to put a humanitarian gloss on its atrocities. More strategically, Qatar’s diplomacy is helping Hamas delay Israel’s long-promised Gaza invasion.

In his inauguration speech, Donald Trump put forth ambitious goals for his first days in office. An additional item that should be on the agenda of his administration, and also that of the 119th Congress, should be defunding, and ideally dismantling, UNRWA. The UN Relief and Works Organization for Palestine Refugees—to give its full name—is deeply enmeshed with Hamas in Gaza, has inculcated generations of young Palestinians with anti-Semitism, and exists primarily to perpetuate the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Robert Satloff explains what must be done.

[T]here is an inherent contradiction in support for UNRWA (given its anti-resettlement posture) and support for a two-state solution (or any negotiated resolution) to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Providing relief to millions of Palestinians based on the argument that their legitimate, rightful home lies inside Israel is deeply counterproductive to the search for peace.

Last October, the Israeli parliament voted overwhelmingly to pass two laws that will come into effect January 30: a ban on UNRWA operations in Israeli sovereign territory and the severing of all Israeli ties with the agency. This includes cancellation of a post-1967 agreement that allowed UNRWA to operate freely in what was then newly occupied territory.

A more ambitious U.S. approach could score a win-win achievement that advances American interests in Middle East peace while saving millions of taxpayer dollars. Namely, Washington could take advantage of Israel’s new laws to create an alternative support mechanism that eases UNRWA out of Gaza. This would entail raising the stakes with other specialized UN agencies operating in the area. Instead of politely asking them if they can assume UNRWA’s job in Gaza, the Trump administration should put them on notice that continued U.S. funding of their own global operations is contingent on their taking over those tasks. Only such a dramatic step is likely to produce results.