Analyst Amit Segal Questions Impact of Pre-Oct. 7 Warning to Netanyahu
Channel 12 commentator Amit Segal addressed a Haaretz report alleging Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu received a warning before the October 7th Hamas attack, asserting that even if the reported conversation occurred, it likely wouldn't have altered the events of that day. Segal emphasized that the Prime Minister's Office categorically denies the report, not just specific details of the alleged conversation. The publication sparked sharp criticism from opposition leaders Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman, and Yair Golan, who argued the report strengthens the need to investigate Netanyahu's conduct prior to the attack. They jointly pledged to establish a state inquiry commission if they form the next government, demanding to know "What did you know, and when did you know it?"
Segal noted the Prime Minister's Office stance is that the entire account, including a 45-minute conversation, is fabricated. He highlighted the significance of the United Arab Emirates' position, stating their silence on the matter is typical and crucial. However, Segal moved beyond the report's veracity to question whether additional warnings would have made a difference, arguing that the failure was not a lack of information but a lack of understanding its implications. He pointed to intelligence indicating two Iranian-funded commando divisions on the border, suggesting the security apparatus misinterpreted the threat.
Segal cited the decision to scramble the "Tequila" team the night before the attack, claiming the readiness was for a limited infiltration, not a large-scale invasion. "No one prepared for an invasion of thousands of terrorists on the morning of October 7th," he stated. Therefore, Segal concluded, even if a conversation with the UAE president took place, it wouldn't have changed anything, as he believes nothing could have.
Comparing the situation to the Yom Kippur War, Segal contrasted the high cost of reserve duty mobilization then with the simpler precautions available before October 7th. "Here there was no cost. It would have been to call the battalions and tell them, 'Listen, there's something, prepare yourselves, maybe war will break out tomorrow.' A phone call costs nothing these days," he remarked. Segal concluded that the core problem leading to the failure was not a lack of intelligence or warnings, but a deficit in strategic thinking.
