UAE Official Denies Netanyahu Received Personal Warning From Emirati President Before Oct. 7
A senior United Arab Emirates source has rejected a central element of a controversial Israeli media report claiming that UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed personally warned Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu about a looming Hamas attack in the days before the Oct. 7, 2023 massacre.
Responding to an inquiry from the Abu Dhabi-based newspaper The National, the Emirati official said sensitive security intelligence between countries is handled through the appropriate professional agencies rather than through direct conversations between national leaders. The statement adds a significant new element to a dispute that has erupted in Israel just weeks before the country’s Oct. 27 election.
The Emirati source said the “UAE discusses security matters with other countries through the relevant entities, and does not discuss such details at the level of national leaders”.
The controversy began with an investigation by Israeli journalists Shlomi Eldar and Ruth Yuval, connected to their new book about the events surrounding Oct. 7. Their account alleged that bin Zayed contacted Netanyahu in late September 2023 after receiving intelligence that then-Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar was preparing a major operation against Israel.
According to their account, Sinwar had conveyed through an intermediary that he was preparing an “earthquake,” prompting concern in Abu Dhabi that Hamas was preparing something far more serious than another limited round of fighting.
Eldar described what he said was the unusual communications arrangement used for conversations between Netanyahu and the Emirati president.
“They have conversations that are conducted in a unique manner. There is a special application developed by the Emirates. A representative from the embassy arrives with the application, with a phone, and they conduct a conversation that lasts 45 minutes,” Eldar said.
The journalists reported that during the alleged conversation, bin Zayed conveyed the warning about Sinwar’s intentions and Netanyahu sought to reassure him.
“We are prepared in Gaza,” Netanyahu reportedly responded.
According to the investigation, Netanyahu believed that if serious violence erupted, it was more likely to occur in Judea and Samaria rather than Gaza. The report further alleged that Netanyahu did not subsequently relay the purported conversation to then-IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, then-Shin Bet chief Ronen Bar or Mossad director David Barnea.
Netanyahu has categorically denied that the conversation ever occurred.
The Prime Minister’s Office said earlier this month that it had examined Netanyahu’s communications records and found no evidence of any conversation with bin Zayed between the beginning of September 2023 and the Hamas attack on Oct. 7.
Netanyahu subsequently instructed his attorneys to pursue a defamation action against Haaretz, Eldar and others connected to the report. His office described the allegation as a fabrication and argued that the timing of its publication was politically motivated.
The Prime Minister’s Office said in its response that the Prime Minister’s Office itself, the National Security Council and Netanyahu’s military secretary had all reviewed the relevant records.
According to Netanyahu’s office, official conversations between the prime minister and bin Zayed are ordinarily conducted through an Emirati representative who physically arrives at the Prime Minister’s Office with a special encrypted communications device. Such conversations are documented, the office said.
Officials also examined entry records for the Prime Minister’s Office during the relevant period and, according to Netanyahu’s account, found no record of an Emirati representative entering the compound for such a conversation.
Netanyahu’s office has characterized the report as “a false libel against the prime minister that never happened and was never created.”
Netanyahu later called the story “a sinister libel with clear political timing, as part of the left’s election campaign,” arguing that additional politically motivated allegations could emerge ahead of the election.
The UAE’s response to the controversy has developed in stages. When the allegation first emerged earlier this month, the Emirati Foreign Ministry stopped short of explicitly confirming or denying whether a conversation between the two leaders had occurred.
At the time, the ministry said the UAE government “does not comment on reports or speculations published in the media regarding conversations between government leaders”.
The ministry added that Emirati and Israeli government agencies have maintained direct communication channels since diplomatic relations were established under the Abraham Accords and said relevant intelligence continues to be shared between the appropriate bodies when necessary.
The latest statement from an official Emirati source goes further by directly addressing how such security information would normally be handled. The source’s assertion that intelligence matters are dealt with by the relevant agencies rather than by national leaders contradicts the reported account of bin Zayed personally conveying such a warning to Netanyahu.
The dispute has taken on heightened political significance because questions surrounding what Israeli political and security leaders knew before Oct. 7 remain deeply contested. The Hamas-led attack killed approximately 1,200 people in Israel and saw 251 people taken hostage, according to Israeli figures.
The alleged Emirati warning has consequently become part of the political debate ahead of Israel’s upcoming election, with Netanyahu’s opponents citing the Haaretz investigation in their criticism of his handling of the period preceding the attack, while Netanyahu and his office insist the reported conversation simply never happened.
Netanyahu has also rejected a separate allegation that Egypt provided him with a specific advance warning before Oct. 7, saying that claim was already investigated and disproven shortly after the war began.
The latest Emirati statement does not establish whether intelligence concerning Hamas intentions was exchanged at lower levels between Emirati and Israeli agencies before Oct. 7. Indeed, the UAE has explicitly said the two countries maintain channels for sharing relevant intelligence. What the Emirati source disputed is the account that such detailed security information was discussed directly at the leadership level.
With Netanyahu threatening legal action and the journalists standing behind their reporting, the question of whether the alleged 45-minute conversation ever took place has moved beyond a dispute over the intelligence failures preceding Oct. 7 and become a significant issue in Israel’s current election campaign.
