How Netanyahu survived the political fallout from the October 7 attacks
Three years ago, thousands of Hamas-led militants breached the border between Gaza and Israel in a surprise attack, killing 1,205 people and taking 251 as hostages back to the Gaza Strip. Israel responded with a heavy hand and launched a military campaign in Gaza during which at least 74,347 people have been killed, according to the enclave's Hamas-run health ministry.
The events have left deep scars in Israel, where voters will elect a new parliament on October 27, and have become a central issue in the campaign.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is running for another term, but the question of what he knew before the deadly attacks three years ago is hanging over Israel's longest-serving leader. As Israel heads to the polls, reports that Arab leaders warned him of a looming Hamas offensive have not let up.
What Netanyahu knew
Israeli journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval revealed that President Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) had warned Netanyahu by phone about 10 days before the October 7 attacks in 2023 that a major confrontation with Hamas was coming.
In extracts of their book that were first published on September 8 by Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the journalists cited “three foreign senior sources” and a Palestinian adviser to bin Zayed who all confirmed that the UAE's president telephoned the Israeli leader. During their 45-minute conversation, bin Zayed allegedly told Netanyahu that a former Hamas leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, was planning a major operation that could lead to “bloodshed” and even “destabilise the region”. To bin Zayed's surprise, the journalists reported, “Netanyahu reacted calmly” and said “Israel was prepared for any scenario”.
The report went on to say that bin Zayed told former CIA director William J. Burns about the conversation. But for his part, Netanyahu did not brief state security agency Shin Bet, the Mossad intelligence agency or his army chief of staff about the call.
The prime minister's office denied the accusations, saying no warning was given and that the report was a “wicked fabrication with clear political timing” by left-wing Israeli officials.
Netanyahu has since sued Haaretz for defamation. But the newspaper is standing its ground and has been backed by The New York Times, which confirmed and added details to the report.
The debate over whether Netanyahu knew about the October 7 attacks has now reached a boiling point. Reports of Egyptian intelligence chief Abbas Kamel also warning Netanyahu days before Hamas breached the border, published by The Atlantic and the Wall Street Journal, have also flooded the scene.
The UAE has not directly addressed the reports but has acknowledged that “when necessary, all relevant intelligence has been and continues to be communicated” since Abu Dhabi reestablished relations with Israel in 2020.
Netanyahu made a secret trip to Abu Dhabi on September 27 and met with bin Zayed for about an hour, which Israel's Channel 12 first reported. One source said the discussion centred on the Haaretz report and that Netanyahu asked the Emirati leader to deny that he had warned the Israeli leader of a looming attack.
Netanyahu's office rejected the claim, dismissing it as “fake news”, while the official Emirates News Agency said the two sides met to discuss “bilateral relations”.
Deflect and deny
Netanyahu's response to the reports has been mainly to shift the blame onto others, in stark contrast to several of Israel's senior security officials.
Former military chief of staff Herzi Halevi took responsibility for letting the October 7 attacks happen and stepped down in January 2025. Following his resignation, an internal investigation carried out by the Israeli Defence Forces acknowledged the attacks as one of its “greatest failures”.
A few months later, the Israeli government sacked the head of its Shin Bet intelligence agency, Ronen Bar. The decision was in part fallout from an internal report on the October 7 attack, but Netanyahu also cited an ongoing “lack of trust” as a reason to dismiss Bar.
Bar responded with a letter saying the Israeli prime minister's arguments were “unsubstantiated accusations” and that his real motive was to “prevent investigations into the events leading up to October 7”.
Just hours after Netanyahu renewed his accusations against Bar, on September 28 the former intelligence chief threatened to sue for defamation. He said the Israeli leader was “attempting to deflect blame away from himself by levelling accusations at those who warned him in real time,” according to an article published by The Times of Israel.
Read more Netanyahu gave a 'victory to Hamas' by rejecting US-backed Gaza peace plan
“Faced with these allegations, Netanyahu has counter-attacked by pointing his finger to a 'deep state' composed of security services and left-wing bureaucratic elites. What he is actually saying is that generals, leaders, security agencies and judges have sought his downfall by allowing the October 7 attacks to take place,” said Nicolas Rouger, a journalist based in Israel and author of the book “Netanyahu – Agent of Chaos”.
The Israeli leader has even claimed his security chiefs intentionally let him sleep for hours after Hamas launched its assault on October 7 for fear he would trigger an aggressive response and immediately put the entire military on alert. “If they would have woken me up, everything would have looked different,” he said in a campaign video posted on X in August.
A schedule published by Netanyahu's office contradicts the claim, however, saying he was informed at 6:29am of an attack from the Gaza Strip.
“Whether it's his ongoing corruption trial or the allegations of ignored warnings, scandals seem to roll off him like water off a duck's back,” said Sylvaine Bulle, an expert on Israeli society and professor of sociology at Paris's EHESS university. “He is very nimble and politically astute. The more Netanyahu absolves himself of all responsibility, the more points he scores.”
Read more Raising the Altalena: Netanyahu digs up sunken 1948 arms ship in 'pre-election stunt'
Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected calls to set up a state inquiry into the October 7 attacks – even as the army and intelligence services have investigated their own conduct – saying an investigation can only be launched once the war is over.
Despite much of the Israeli public being in favour of an independent investigation, Netanyahu claimed in November last year that most Israelis didn't believe in such a commission and proposed a separate committee established by the prime minister himself.
Neck and neck
Gadi Eisenkot, a former military chief who has become Netanyahu's main challenger ahead of the October 27 elections, accused the veteran prime minister of dodging accountability for security failures. He dismissed Netanyahu's explanations, including the claim that he wasn't woken early enough on the morning of the attack, as feeble excuses.
In a post on X, Eisenkot said Netanyahu had “ignored” dozens of warnings before October 7 and declared him “unfit” to lead.
Netanyahu's rivals, including Eisenkot, have promised to establish an independent commission of inquiry if elected.
Read more Israeli ex-army chief emerges as main rival to Netanyahu ahead of general election
But some believe Israeli voters are unlikely to be swayed by a centrist bloc led by Eisenkot amid the increasingly rightward shift of the electorate – notably among the youth.
“The opposition carries little weight. Their campaign doesn't have much substance, even if [Eisenkot] has a clear path ahead. By neglecting issues like domestic policy, social justice, housing and the fight against regional inequalities, it has allowed religious parties to take control of social issues among the religious working classes,” said Bulle.
Though Netanyahu may be slightly weakened by the reports about him, he still has a loyal base.
“In Netanyahu's view, Jewish people drift from one catastrophe to the next, and Netanyahu embodies a captain who can steer the ship through the storm,” said Rouger. “October 7 confirmed that, making force the only acceptable response. That rhetoric is very well-honed in Israel and has been internalised by the population.”
“The trauma of October 7 has not weakened Netanyahu's traditional support base, it has strengthened it,” added Bulle.
“He is the only person who can turn an entire nation's fear of existential threat into votes. He has been doing it for three years and it's working.”
Nevertheless, the latest polls show Eisenkot slightly ahead of Netanyahu in the upcoming elections, with 54 Knesset seats against 49 for the current prime minister's coalition.
“Even among Israelis who oppose Netanyahu, acknowledge he is corrupt and that his leadership is chaotic, international criticism always comes up against a brick wall. When the International Criminal Court put out an arrest warrant against him for crimes committed in the Gaza Strip, the argument of anti-Semitism took precedence above all else,” Rouger noted.
“Israelis only trust the Israeli media,” he said. “The rest – who are reporting on the destruction of Gaza, for example – are virtually invisible.”