WASHINGTON, Sep 10 (Alliance News): A new report by Israeli newspaper Haaretz has triggered a political controversy in Israel by alleging that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was personally warned by United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan about preparations for a major Hamas operation around 10 days before the October 7, 2023 attack.
The report, based on an investigation by Haaretz journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval for an upcoming book, claims that Netanyahu and Sheikh Mohamed spoke by telephone for about 45 minutes in late September 2023.
According to the report, the UAE president raised concerns about Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and warned that Hamas was preparing a major military operation that could cause significant bloodshed, destabilise the region and threaten the Abraham Accords, the US-brokered agreements normalising relations between Israel and several Arab states.
The allegation has revived one of the central questions surrounding the October 7 attack: what did Netanyahu know before the assault, when did he know it and how did his government respond?
Netanyahu denies report
Netanyahu’s office has categorically rejected the allegation, calling it an “absolute lie”.
The prime minister’s office said Netanyahu did not speak with the UAE president during the period mentioned in the report and did not receive such a warning.
Netanyahu has also argued that there would have been a record of such a conversation and rejected the suggestion that he personally received a warning from the UAE leadership and failed to act on it.
His office has said that intelligence exchanges between Israel and the UAE would have been handled through established channels.
The UAE has not publicly confirmed the alleged 45-minute conversation. Its Foreign Ministry has declined to comment on reports or speculation about conversations between leaders while maintaining the longstanding communication and intelligence-sharing relationship between the two countries.
The alleged conversation has therefore been reported by Haaretz but has not been independently established as fact.
What Haaretz report alleges
According to the Haaretz investigation, information reaching the UAE suggested that Sinwar had become increasingly frustrated with the slow progress of negotiations involving Israel and Hamas.
The report says intermediaries involved in contacts between Israel and Hamas provided information indicating that Sinwar was preparing a major operation.
The UAE leadership, according to the report, became sufficiently concerned to raise the issue directly with Netanyahu.
Sheikh Mohamed allegedly warned that a major Hamas operation could lead to widespread bloodshed, destabilise the region and put the Abraham Accords at risk.
The report further alleges that Netanyahu responded relatively calmly and indicated that Israel was prepared for possible scenarios.
However, according to the investigation, Netanyahu’s assessment was focused more heavily on the possibility of a threat emerging from the West Bank rather than a large-scale assault from Gaza.
The most serious allegation concerns the handling of the reported warning. The investigation claims senior Israeli security officials were not briefed about it.
If the allegation were eventually established, it could raise questions about the handling of intelligence at the highest levels of Israel’s political leadership.
October 7 attack
Around 10 days after the alleged conversation, Hamas-led militants launched a surprise attack on Israel on October 7, 2023.
The attackers breached the Gaza border and struck Israeli military positions and civilian communities in southern Israel.
About 1,200 people were killed and 251 people were taken hostage.
The attack triggered Israel’s military campaign in Gaza and contributed to a wider regional conflict involving Lebanon and Iran.
The scale of the assault shocked Israel and exposed major failures involving intelligence, military readiness, border security and political decision-making.
Responsibility for those failures remains one of the most contentious issues in Israeli politics.
Earlier warnings also under scrutiny
The UAE allegation is not the first report suggesting that Israel received warnings before October 7.
Egyptian intelligence officials had previously raised concerns about Hamas preparations before the attack.
Israeli and international reporting has examined whether Egyptian warnings were passed to the appropriate Israeli authorities and whether they were correctly interpreted.
A separate report published alongside the latest Haaretz controversy said Egyptian intelligence had conveyed information to Israel indicating that Hamas was planning an operation intended to “make the ground in Gaza tremble.”
Israeli surveillance personnel had also reportedly observed unusual Hamas activity in the months before the attack, including training exercises and preparations that later appeared to resemble elements of the assault.
Despite those indications, Israel’s intelligence establishment did not assess that Hamas was preparing to launch the type of large-scale attack that ultimately took place.
Calls for state inquiry
The intelligence and security failures surrounding October 7 have led to widespread criticism of Israel’s military and intelligence agencies as well as the political leadership.
The latest allegations have intensified calls from opposition politicians for a comprehensive state investigation into the events leading up to the attack.
Opposition figures, including former military chief Gadi Eisenkot and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, have criticised Netanyahu and demanded accountability for what they describe as catastrophic leadership failures.
The controversy has raised several questions:
- Did Netanyahu receive a warning before October 7?
- If he did, why was Israel’s security leadership not informed?
- What intelligence did the prime minister possess before the attack?
- Why was the threat from Gaza not treated as an imminent danger?
Opposition parties have said that, if they form the next government, establishing a state commission of inquiry into the failures surrounding October 7 would be among their priorities.
Netanyahu threatens legal action
The dispute has also moved beyond political criticism, with Netanyahu saying he intends to take legal action against Haaretz and journalist Shlomi Eldar over the report.
Haaretz has stood by its reporting.
The controversy comes ahead of Israel’s first national election since the October 7 attack and the wars that followed in Gaza, Lebanon and Iran.
The issue could carry significant political consequences for Netanyahu, whose political reputation has long been built around national security and his ability to protect Israel from its enemies.
The October 7 attack severely damaged that image and remains a major political challenge for the prime minister.
The latest allegations could add another contentious issue to an election already dominated by security, Gaza, regional conflicts and Netanyahu’s leadership.
