Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has instructed lawyers to begin defamation proceedings against the newspaper Haaretz after it reported that the UAE president warned him of an imminent Hamas attack more than a week before the October 7, 2023 assault. Netanyahu’s office called the report an 'absolute lie' and part of a 'sinister plot,' while Haaretz rejected the claim and said the lawsuit's 'sole purpose is to silence journalistic criticism.'
Netanyahu's legal move follows the publication of book extracts by Haaretz alleging that UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan warned the prime minister in a phone call ten days before the attack that Hamas chief Yahya Sinwar was planning a major operation that would lead to bloodshed and destabilise the region. According to Haaretz, Netanyahu reacted with relative calm, assuring the Emirati leader that Israel was prepared and that a potential attack was more likely to come from the occupied West Bank. The paper reported that the warning was not passed on to Israeli defence or intelligence officials.
Netanyahu has vehemently denied the account, stating there was no phone call with Sheikh Mohammed at any point in September or early October 2023. His office said that 'no warning was given to the prime minister from the United Arab Emirates before 7 October' and that if any relevant information existed, it was passed through intelligence channels between the two countries.
The UAE Foreign Ministry declined to comment on 'speculation regarding conversations between government leaders,' but noted that Israel and the UAE have maintained 'open and direct lines of communication' since normalising ties, and that 'when necessary, all relevant intelligence has been and continues to be communicated.'
The controversy erupts as Israel's general election campaign intensifies, with the October 27 vote widely seen as a referendum on Netanyahu's leadership. His main rival, former top general Gadi Eisenkot, accused Netanyahu of ignoring dozens of warnings ahead of the attack, writing on social media that 'He is unfit.' Another opponent, former prime minister Naftali Bennett, said Netanyahu 'bears personal and direct responsibility for the failure that led to the deaths of thousands of Israelis on his watch.'
Ever since the October 7 attack, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 taken hostage, Netanyahu has faced accusations that he did not act swiftly enough. He has resisted calls for an independent public inquiry into the events.
Analysis
Why This Matters
- The defamation suit elevates a press freedom battle at a politically sensitive moment for Israel, as voters prepare to go to the polls to decide Netanyahu's fate.
- The core claim — that a foreign leader personally warned Netanyahu of an impending attack — directly challenges the prime minister's long-standing defence of his actions before October 7.
- The legal case could force disclosure of call logs, intelligence-sharing records and other sensitive diplomatic materials, potentially revealing more about pre-attack communications.
Background
Netanyahu has been under sustained pressure over his handling of the October 7, 2023 attack, in which Hamas-led gunmen breached the Gaza border and killed about 1,200 people and took 251 hostages. Israel's subsequent military campaign in Gaza has killed at least 73,670 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, figures the UN considers reliable. Netanyahu has long resisted an independent state inquiry into the failures surrounding the attack. Haaretz, a left-leaning Israeli newspaper, has been a vocal critic of the prime minister. The Abraham Accords, normalising relations between Israel and several Arab nations including the UAE, were signed in 2020.
Key Perspectives
[Netanyahu and his office]: The report is an 'absolute lie' and part of a 'sinister plot' to smear the prime minister ahead of the election. No phone call with the UAE president occurred in the relevant period, and any relevant intelligence was handled through proper channels.
[Haaretz]: The paper stands by its reporting based on book extracts from its journalists. It rejects the defamation threat, arguing the lawsuit's 'sole purpose is to silence journalistic criticism.'
[Israeli opposition leaders]: The report, if true, proves Netanyahu was unfit for office. Gadi Eisenkot and Naftali Bennett have publicly accused the prime minister of ignoring warnings and bearing personal responsibility for the attack's death toll.
What to Watch
- Whether the defamation case proceeds and whether Haaretz seeks to defend the claim by subpoenaing communications records or witness testimony.
- The UAE's next public response: its Foreign Ministry has declined to comment on specific conversations but may be drawn into the legal proceedings.
- The impact on the October 27 election: polls will show whether this revelation shifts voter sentiment as the campaign enters its final weeks.