https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_and_state-sponsored_terr...

Sure. Hence why I qualified my statement with "continuing." Doha hosting Hamas in '17 was fine. Doha hosting them after October 7 is fair to criticise.

Yes. Hamas was seen by even Israel as better than anarchy. That's why they let Doha fund them.

We're now seeing American lawmakers criticising Qatar [1]. That's prompting Dohas to "re-evaluat[e] its role as mediator in ceasefire talks" and weigh "whether to allow Hamas to continue operating [its] political office" [2][3].

[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/qatar-says-gaza-ce...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/qatar-says-gaza-ce...

[3] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/qatar-considers-fu...

Better then anarchy or better than peace? There is some people on both sides of this conflict which are happy to see it radicalized and I think those people all benefits from the other being strong on the other side.

All that said, the actions taken by the Israeli right are certainly not helping the possibility of a future peace agreement, but it's not clear whether this specific action belongs in that group. One might argue that a stronger central authority in Gaza means there is a partner for a future agreement and that if Gaza can transition to be a more peaceful place (and it seemed to be heading in that direction) that would also support a future agreement.

Qatar is not a western country, there is no reason to expect it to buy into western exceptionalism. This is not to defend Hamas but simply to point out that the western double standard doesn’t reach much beyond Europe.

America is (a) a country and (b) major trading and security partner.

> Qatar is not a western country, there is no reason to expect it to buy into western exceptionalism

We are their security guarantor. It’s why Doha is publicly debating shutting down Hamas’ political office.