Public attitudes in ‘ally’ Qatar at odds with US Middle East priorities: poll

One-third of respondents in Qatar also disapproved of Trump’s May 2018 withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — better known as the Iran nuclear deal. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 27 October 2020
Follow

Public attitudes in ‘ally’ Qatar at odds with US Middle East priorities: poll

  • Arab News/YouGov pan-Arab survey shows gulf between Qatar’s claim to being US ally and public opinion
  • Most respondents said Trump’s actions, notably the killing of General Soleimani, were negative for the region

DUBAI, ERBIL: For a country that advertises itself as a close ally of the US, hosting America’s biggest military contingent in the Middle East at Al-Udeid air base near Doha and spending billions of dollars on US military hardware, public attitudes in Qatar are conspicuously out of sync with the thinking in Washington on Middle East issues.
That is according to the findings of the Arab News/YouGov pan-Arab survey. From the killing on Jan. 3 of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani to US President Donald Trump’s role in the fight against extremism in the Middle East, respondents in Qatar belonged to that segment of Arab opinion most critical of Washington’s recent actions.
The question — to what extent has Trump has helped or hindered the fight against extremism — was put to 1,960 people in 18 Arab countries. Overall, 56 percent of the respondents felt he had hindered the fight. Among respondents from Qatar, this view soared to 79 percent.
Respondents in Qatar also disapproved of Trump’s May 2018 withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — better known as the Iran nuclear deal.
“Despite the official relationship between Qatar and the US, every single Qatari media outlet, especially Al Jazeera, is bombarding Qatari public opinion and the Arab world with anti-Trump talk,” said Dr. Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, former chairman of the Arab Council for Social Sciences.
“They are the ones that shape public opinion and it seems that this is fine with the Qatari government, despite the fact that they have a vast relationship with the Trump administration. So, this shows a kind of contradiction at the official level with public opinion.”


READ: The methodology behind the Arab News/YouGov Pan-Arab Survey


Since the Arab boycott of Qatar began on June 5, 2017, the gas-rich Gulf state has taken a number of steps to strengthen its relations with the US in order to assuage the effects of diplomatic isolation. But it has also continued its manifold engagement with a country viewed by many in the US foreign-policy establishment as a “malign actor,” Iran. The two countries happen to share the world’s biggest natural-gas field, South Pars.
The upshot is that public opinion in Qatar is somewhat softer on Iran than elsewhere in the Arab region, if the Arab News/YouGov survey findings are any guide. The killing of Soleimani was viewed as “negative for the region” by 52 percent of respondents overall, but feelings were especially strong in Qatar, where 62 percent saw it that way.
By contrast, the strike was viewed as “positive for the region” in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iraq respectively by 68 percent, 71 percent and 57 percent of respondents. Soleimani, who headed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Al-Quds Force from 1998 until his death, was killed in a US drone strike near Baghdad Airport alongside the commander of Iran’s paramilitary proxies in Iraq, Abu Mahdi Al-Muhandis.
The disparity was also apparent when people in Qatar were asked what the next US president should do about relations with Iran. A substantial (55 percent) number called for the nuclear deal to be revived, while a smaller amount (16 percent) favored the continuation of sanctions and for Washington to maintain a war posture.

Again, by comparison, of 1,949 respondents in the wider MENA region, just 34 percent said they want to see the JCPOA revived and 33 percent said they want to see the sanctions continued and the US to maintain a war posture.
Given the apparent opposition in Qatar to the Trump agenda on Iran — and the expectation that his Democratic rival Joe Biden may revive the nuclear deal he helped draft in 2015 — it is perhaps unsurprising that just 6 percent of the respondents in Qatar said they would vote for Trump if given the opportunity, while 57 percent said they would vote for Biden.
Granted the wider region also appears to favor Biden over Trump — with 12 percent saying they would vote for the Republican incumbent and 40 percent signaling they would back the Democratic challenger — but the antipathy in Qatar seems particularly stark.
For Varsha Koduvayur, senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, the results of the new Arab News/YouGov survey reflect public awareness of the sharp geopolitical tensions in the region since Soleimani’s death.
“This tit for tat we saw between Washington and Tehran was certainly a factor in how respondents viewed this question,” Koduvayur told Arab News.
She said Doha’s relationship with Tehran was one of the “straws that broke the camel’s back” when the GCC countries chose to impose their embargo. “Qatar has always been this outlier, not always in a positive sense, in the GCC,” she said.

The Arab News/YouGov survey results seem to confirm this difference of opinion. “This response underscores that notion to me,” Koduvayur told Arab News. “Qatar has its own independent policies at times but this doesn’t always gel well with what the rest of the GCC is thinking, nor is it always comfortable with what the US is thinking or with US interests in the region.”
Finally, for a country accused by three fellow GCC members and Egypt of supporting extremism through its backing of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Qatar data offered few surprises. “Containing Iran and Hezbollah,” “Weakening Islamist parties” and “Quashing radical Islamic terrorism” received respectively 17 percent, 6 percent and 6 percent support from respondents in Qatar to the question “What would you want the next US president to focus on in the coming years?”
Presumably for the same reasons, the perception of “radical Islamic terrorism,” “Iran” and “Islamist parties” as the “three biggest threats facing the Arab world” garnered respectively 22 percent, 11 percent and 7 percent from respondents in Qatar, in contrast with the relatively higher regionwide figures — 33 percent, 20 percent and 16 percent.

Twitter: @CalineMalek

 


NGOs fear ‘catastrophic impact’ of new Israel registration rules

Updated 3 sec ago
Follow

NGOs fear ‘catastrophic impact’ of new Israel registration rules

  • NGOs working in Israel and occupied Palestinian territories have until December 31 to register under the new framework
  • Save the Children is among the charities already barred under the new rules
PARIS: New rules in Israel for registering non-governmental organizations, under which more than a dozen groups have already been rejected, could have a catastrophic impact on aid work in Gaza and the West Bank, relief workers warn.
The NGOs have until December 31 to register under the new framework, which Israel says aims not to impede aid distribution but to prevent “hostile actors or supporters of terrorism” operating in the Palestinian territories.
The controversy comes with Gaza, which lacks running water and electricity, still battling a humanitarian crisis even after the US-brokered October ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas, sparked by the Palestinian militant group’s October 7, 2023 attack on Israel.
Israel’s Ministry of Diaspora Affairs and Combating Antisemitism told AFP that, as of November 2025, approximately 100 registration requests had been submitted and “only 14 organization requests have been rejected... The remainder have been approved or are currently under review.”
Requests are rejected for “organizations involved in terrorism, antisemitism, delegitimization of Israel, Holocaust denial, denial of the crimes of October 7,” it said.

‘Very problematic’

The amount of aid entering Gaza remains inadequate. While the October 10 ceasefire agreement stipulated the entry of 600 trucks per day, only 100 to 300 are carrying humanitarian aid, according to NGOs and the United Nations.
The NGOs barred under the new rules include Save the Children, one of the best known and oldest in Gaza, where it helps 120,000 children, and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC).
They are being given 60 days to withdraw all their international staff from the Gaza Strip, the occupied West Bank and Israel, and will no longer be able to send humanitarian supplies across the border to Gaza.
In Gaza, Save the Children’s local staff and partners “remain committed to providing crucial services for children,” such as psychosocial support and education, a spokeswoman told AFP.
The forum that brings together UN agencies and NGOs working in the area on Thursday issued a statement urging Israel to “lift all impediments,” including the new registration process, that “risk the collapse of the humanitarian response.”
The Humanitarian Country Team of the Occupied Palestinian Territory (HCT) warned that dozens of NGOs face deregistration and that, while some had been registered, “these NGOs represent only a fraction of the response in Gaza and are nowhere near the number required just to meet immediate and basic needs.”
“The deregistration of NGOs in Gaza will have a catastrophic impact on access to essential and basic services,” it said.
NGOs contacted by AFP, several of whom declined to be quoted on the record due to the sensitivity of the issue, say they complied with most of Israel’s requirements to provide a complete dossier.
Some, however, refused to cross what they described as a “red line” of providing information about their Palestinian staff.
“After speaking about genocide, denouncing the conditions under which the war was being waged and the restrictions imposed on the entry of aid, we tick all the boxes” to fail the registration, predicted the head of one NGO.
“Once again, bureaucratic pressure is being used for political control, with catastrophic consequences,” said the relief worker.
Rights groups and NGOs including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have accused Israel of carrying out a genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, a term vehemently rejected by the Israeli government.
“If NGOs are considered to be harmful for passing on testimonies from populations, carrying out operational work and saying what is happening and this leads to a ban on working, then this is very problematic,” said Jean-Francois Corty, president of French NGO Medecins du Monde.

- ‘Every little criticism’ -

The most contentious requirement for the NGOs is to prove they do not work for the “delegitimization” of Israel, a term that appears related to calling into question Israel’s right to exist but which aid workers say is dangerously vague.
“Israel sees every little criticism as a reason to deny their registration... We don’t even know what delegitimization actually means,” said Yotam Ben-Hillel, an Israeli lawyer who is assisting several NGOs with the process and has filed legal appeals.
He said the applications of some NGOs had already been turned down on these grounds.
“So every organization that operates in Gaza and the West Bank and sees what happens and reports on that could be declared as illegal now, because they just report on what they see,” he told AFP.
With the December 31 deadline looming, concerns focus on what will happen in early 2026 if the NGOs that are selected lack the capacity and expertise of organizations with a long-standing presence.
Several humanitarian actors told AFP they had “never heard of” some of the accredited NGOs, which currently have no presence in Gaza but were reportedly included in Trump’s plan for Gaza.
“The United States is starting from scratch, and with the new registration procedure, some NGOs will leave,” said a European diplomatic source in the region, asking not to be named. “They might wake up on January 1 and realize there is no-one to replace them.”