New Allegations Over Pre-October 7 Warnings Put Netanyahu on the Defensive as Israeli Elections Near

With Israel's parliamentary elections set for October 27, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is confronting a renewed wave of scrutiny over what he knew—and when—before the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023. The controversy, which has simmered for three years, resurfaced sharply this week after a Wall Street Journal report alleged that Egypt's intelligence chief, Abbas Kamel, personally telephoned Netanyahu just days before the assault to warn him of an impending Hamas attack.

According to the report, Kamel's call was not an isolated gesture. In September 2023, the Egyptian intelligence chief is said to have traveled to Israel to warn security officials in person that Hamas was preparing an assault. The Sunday revelation adds a new layer to a growing body of reporting suggesting that multiple foreign leaders and intelligence channels flagged the danger before it materialized.

The Egyptian warnings follow earlier reports in Israeli and US media this month indicating that United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, commonly known as MBZ, warned Netanyahu in the week before October 7 that Hamas's then-leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, was planning the attack. Together, the accounts portray a prime minister who was repeatedly cautioned by regional allies about an imminent threat.

Netanyahu has categorically denied receiving any advance warning and has taken legal action over the claims. Neither Kamel nor the Egyptian government has publicly commented on the reports, and the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs has stated that it does not discuss media reports or speculation about conversations between government leaders. The silence from the governments involved has done little to quiet the political storm inside Israel.

In an attempt to deflect responsibility, Netanyahu has sought to shift blame onto Ronen Bar, the former head of Israel's internal security service, Shin Bet. Bar announced on Monday that he would sue the prime minister for defamation, escalating a long-running feud between the two men. Bar, a longtime political adversary of Netanyahu, has previously accused the prime minister of demanding illegal operations, making the legal showdown a deeply personal as well as political battle.

Polling indicates that the events surrounding October 7—which killed 1,139 people in Israel—and questions about who bears responsibility for the security failures that preceded the attack remain significant concerns for voters. Continued media coverage has kept the trauma of that day at the center of public debate more than three years after Israel launched its war on Gaza, which has killed more than 74,000 Palestinians.

Security analyst Ahron Bregman, a senior teaching fellow at King's College London, offered an explanation for why the warnings may have gone unheeded. "We know that Egypt's Chief of Intelligence flew to Israel on September 26 and warned Israel of a... Hamas attack," Bregman said. "We also know that similar messages came from MBZ." He attributed the failure to what Israeli security circles call ha-conceptzia—the underlying assumptions that shape decision-making.

"And Israel, not only Netanyahu, believed in the conception that Hamas was deterred and all it wanted was to push Israel a little bit to ease the pressure and blockade on Gaza," Bregman explained. That entrenched belief, shared across much of Israel's security establishment, helps explain why repeated warnings from Egypt and the UAE were allegedly dismissed rather than acted upon.

Netanyahu's two main rivals in the race for prime minister have wasted no time seizing on the allegations. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, who leads the Beyachad (Together) alliance, said that if the claims are proven true, Netanyahu "cannot continue to serve in his position for another minute." The statement reflects the intense stakes of an election campaign in which national security credentials are paramount.

Former military chief of staff Gadi Eisenkot, whose Yashar party leads Netanyahu's Likud in the polls by the narrowest of margins, was equally blunt. "Netanyahu received dozens of warnings for October 7 and ignored them all. He is unfit," Eisenkot said. The twin attacks from Bennett and Eisenkot suggest that the warnings controversy could become a central issue in the final weeks of the campaign.

Despite the severity of the allegations, the reports do not appear to have significantly shifted the election polls so far. Nevertheless, the latest Wall Street Journal revelations are likely to alarm those within Netanyahu's campaign who have already invested considerable time and resources into shaping the public narrative ahead of voting day.

The episode also raises broader questions about accountability and the mechanics of Israel's security decision-making. If multiple allied governments conveyed specific, credible warnings, the question of why they were not translated into preventive action is likely to haunt the prime minister—and his successors—for years to come, regardless of the election's outcome.

With less than a month until Israelis cast their ballots, the controversy over October 7 warnings has become an unavoidable fixture of the campaign. For Netanyahu, the challenge is twofold: fending off legal battles on multiple fronts while convincing voters that he is still the leader best equipped to protect the country. For his rivals, the allegations offer a potent weapon—one they appear determined to wield until polling day.