A New York Times report published September 25 added another layer to the dispute over claims that the United Arab Emirates warned Israel before the October 7 attack. The Times headline said Benjamin Netanyahu was “said to have been warned” by the Emirati leader about a Hamas attack. But the article’s indexed summary contains an important qualification: the alleged warning “lacked specific details about the nature of an attack.”
According to descriptions of the Times report, two anonymous sources said UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed conveyed information to Netanyahu that Hamas was considering a major attack. One source said the information did not clarify whether Hamas was planning rocket fire or a ground incursion. The Times also reported, citing five former senior Israeli officials, that the alleged warning did not reach Israel’s security chiefs. The available description contains no attack date, infiltration route, hostage plan or other operational detail.
An earlier allegation was similar, but not identical
Earlier in September, Haaretz, drawing on reporting for a book by Shlomi Eldar and Ruti Yuval, alleged that bin Zayed personally called Netanyahu roughly a week and a half before October 7 and warned of a major Hamas operation. The Associated Press and other outlets said they had not independently confirmed the claim. An unnamed Emirati source later told The Times of Israel that such a call had taken place.
Netanyahu and his office deny both the call and the warning. Netanyahu said a review by the Prime Minister’s Office found no record of a call with bin Zayed during the relevant period, and he announced plans to sue Haaretz.
Why the wording matters
A broad warning that Hamas may be considering a major operation is not the same as advance knowledge of the October 7 attack as it unfolded. The available reporting supports the existence of a disputed allegation about strategic warning, but it does not establish that Netanyahu received the date or operational plan of the attack. The call itself also remains disputed. Claims that “Netanyahu knew October 7 was coming” therefore go beyond what the reviewed evidence establishes.
