Since the Second World War and the emergence of great powers, little consideration has been given to the role of smaller countries in conflict management. As opposed to what academics and IR scholars refer to as major or great powers, which receive a lot of attention from researchers. The majority of IR scholars focus on the great powers, their position in the international system, and their methods for resolving disputes. Because it is difficult to define small states and because different scholars have different definitions of what small states are, it is possible that they did not pay attention to them. Smaller countries, however, might also make a significant contribution to resolving disputes. Small countries have successfully resolved many conflicts despite their small size and limited resources, and they have developed to the point where they can now compete with those that are larger and more capable than they are. The aim of this article is to investigate how small countries handle disputes and their role in conflict management. In doing so, this paper focuses on how Qatar contributes to conflict management and explores the mechanism it takes to resolve disputes. And yields three key outcomes: First, despite having a small population and limited territory, small states can successfully settle many conflicts. Second, in many international arenas, small states can compete with large countries and superpowers. Finally, despite Qatar's active role in conflict resolution, there is a limitation to it: it focuses solely on mediation and doesn't employ any other conflict management techniques.

The Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) is considered one of the most important regional organizations in the Middle East and North African (MENA) region, which effectively solves some of the crises in the sub-region and the wider Middle East. GCC has employed many diplomatic procedures to address regional crises, including mediation, negotiation, and arbitration. Undoubtedly, GCC has successfully resolved some intrastate conflicts, particularly border conflicts among its member states. However, despite these achievements, the GCC has failed to resolve several regional disputes, and the continuation of such crises threatens the region’s security and stability. This article seeks to explore why the GCC institutions are ineffective in resolving some regional crises. In doing so, it addresses the comparative study by focusing on two case studies (the Iraq–Iran War and the ongoing Yemen Crisis) and provides three main results: first, the GCC has not directly intervened as an institution to resolve certain disputes; however, some GCC members have acted on its behalf and represented it. Second, despite the GCC member states’ efforts, they are still unable to resolve and settle some disputes because they prioritize self-interest over collaboration. Third, the conflict of interest of various regional actors contributes to the lack of significant progress in resolving crises.