Middle East
Report reveals intelligence failures in October 7 Hamas attack
The Israeli military’s first military report on the October 7, 2023, attacks revealed that Israeli security officials misjudged the Hamas-led attack and grossly underestimated the group’s capabilities. According to the report, Hamas’ intentions were not correctly interpreted even hours before the attack.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the report stated that there were many indications that the attack was imminent, but these were not taken seriously enough by the Israeli authorities. On the evening of October 6, 2023, Hamas militants activated Israeli SIM cards and moved to designated assembly points, but the Israeli authorities did not consider these actions as unusual. The authorities believed that Hamas was either conducting a military exercise, preparing to defend against an attack from Israel, or planning small-scale cross-border raids. However, these signs were ignored as clear signals that Hamas was preparing a large-scale attack.
The report, prepared as a result of the highest-level investigation by the Israeli army, sheds light on one of the biggest security weaknesses in the country’s history. The report stated that Israeli intelligence units misjudged Hamas, ignored documents containing the group’s attack plans, and missed numerous signals. It was emphasized that these intelligence failures triggered the attacks that continued for more than a year after the attack.
Just a few hours before the attack, senior Israeli military officials held discussions about suspicious Hamas activity. However, the urgency of the attack was not recognized. Herzi Halevi, Chief of the Israeli General Staff, ordered a more extensive briefing the following day. That same night, the Israeli general on the northern front was summoned to military headquarters in Tel Aviv in anticipation of an attack by Hezbollah. The Israeli army’s focus on the northern front caused it to lose sight of the threat in Gaza. Hamas took advantage of the Jewish holiday to launch the attack at a time when the border was less guarded than usual.
According to the report, Israeli military planners, when designing a possible attack scenario from Gaza, envisaged that Hamas would at most try to cross between 4 and 8 border points. However, Hamas militants crossed the border at almost 60 points. Their first target was the Israeli military base responsible for the perimeter of the Gaza Strip. Here, they killed senior commanders and destroyed Israel’s intelligence capacity in the area. This left Israel unable to follow developments on the ground in the first three hours of the offensive. 1,200 Israeli soldiers and civilians lost their lives, and 251 were taken hostage. The first reinforcements did not arrive until 5.5 hours later, and it took three days for Hamas to be completely repelled.
According to The Times of Israel, the investigation found that although the Israeli military intercepted plans detailing a possible attack in 2022, it considered it unlikely and that former Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar did not think that an attack would be carried out because he was “pragmatic.”
The report found that Hamas approved this attack plan in 2019, received operational approval in 2021, and began setting a date for the attack in 2022. Despite this, the Israeli authorities stuck to the idea that Hamas did not want to start a war. Israeli intelligence failed to recognize this strategic shift, believing that Hamas was focused on building a state in Gaza and seizing the West Bank.
Hamas saw the political turmoil inside Israel and the protests over judicial reforms as an opportunity. At the height of the attack, Hamas’ military leader, Mohammed Deif, called on the entire population of Gaza to take up arms and attack Israel. By midday on October 7, more than 5,600 militants and civilians had crossed into Israeli territory.
The attack began at 6:29 a.m. when Hamas fired 1,400 rockets into Israel. At 6:45 a.m., an Israeli brigade commander radioed, “We are at war.” However, Israel did not fully understand the situation on the ground in the first hours due to the collapse of the chain of command. Some soldiers and commanders saw news of the attack on social media and traveled to the southern front by their own means. However, large-scale military reinforcements arrived hours later.
Reporting on the report, The Jerusalem Post reported that on October 7, the Israeli Air Force implemented the Hannibal Protocol. The report mentioned that over 5,000 Hamas members had entered Israel from Gaza and that there was concern that many more Gazans could infiltrate into Israel.
According to the Israeli Air Force investigation, following the decision to implement the Hannibal Protocol, the pilots received “highly specific information about where and what to attack.”
Hamas Used Elements of “Deception”
According to Yedioth Ahronoth’s report on the investigation, Israel’s biggest mistake was to believe that Hamas was incapable of waging a large-scale war. “Israel is superior to its enemies” and “the intelligence directorate knows everything,” while Hamas used elements of “deception” to support this perception.
Israel Army Radio reported that investigations showed that the Israeli army was surprised by the speed and planning of the October 7 attack.
Israeli Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi, whose term of office ends on March 6, said at the meeting where the investigations were presented, “I am responsible. On October 7, I was the commander of the army, and I am also responsible for you.” He reiterated that the responsibility lies with him.
Halevi stated that they had failed and that he tried to face failure every day.
Middle East
US envoy says Syria interim leader Sharaa seeks Israel normalization
US Ambassador to Türkiye and Special Envoy for Syria Tom Barrack stated that Syria’s interim president, Ahmed al-Sharaa, wants to normalize relations with Israel.
At the same time, he called for an end to Israel’s military operations in Syria and questioned whether Washington should intervene to halt them.
Speaking at the Global Security Forum held in Doha, Qatar, Barrack said Sharaa had managed difficult circumstances well and was trying to reassure Israel that his government poses no threat.
“I think President Sharaa has done a very good job under very difficult circumstances,” Barrack said, describing the message he believes the Syrian leader is conveying to Israel: “I am not aggressive, I have no problem with Israel, I want relations with Israel to normalize.”
Barrack also urged Israel to stop its operations in Syria, while voicing uncertainty over whether the US should step in to end them:
“It’s time to stop this [Israel’s actions in Syria]. I don’t know if it’s time for the US to intervene to stop it.”
Israel intensified its military operations in Syria following the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad on 8 December 2024. Israeli forces entered the demilitarized “buffer zone” along the Golan Heights and took up positions on the Syrian side of Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Shaykh), with Israel describing the deployment as a temporary security measure.
Israeli air strikes have also targeted military facilities and weapons depots across the country.
Barrack pointed to Syria’s political transition as an example of how groups once viewed as adversaries could be incorporated into new political and security structures.
“You can take Nusra, which was once designated a foreign terrorist organization; following the transformation that took place on December 8, many people today evaluate this example as ‘here is a model,'” the US diplomat said.
The Nusra Front was a jihadist group that emerged during the Syrian civil war and, after pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda, announced its departure from the network. The organization was designated as “terrorist” by several countries and bodies, primarily the US and the UN.
The group’s leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa (Abu Mohammad al-Julani), subsequently headed Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which led the offensive that ousted Assad.
Barrack also highlighted the integration of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) into the Syrian national army as an outcome many had previously considered unlikely.
“Nobody thought you could reintegrate this Kurdish entity, the SDF, into a national army, but it happened,” the US official said.
Damascus and the Kurdish-led forces signed an agreement on 10 March 2025 to integrate the SDF’s military and civilian institutions into the Syrian state.
However, delays occurred in the implementation of the agreement due to disputes over integration terms and the future of self-administration in the region.
Barrack nevertheless expressed doubts about the effectiveness of earlier US interventions in the Middle East, citing Washington’s involvement in what he characterized as “23 regime changes” across the wider region.
“Whenever we have tried to intervene, to change a person or a regime, it seems to have been a mistake,” Barrack said, while also questioning the value of US intervention in Yemen, describing it as apparently “senseless.”
Middle East
US and Israel weigh Iran strikes after midterm vote, reports say
The US and Israeli defence ministries have drawn up plans for a fresh assault on Iran, with the envisioned offensive under consideration to launch after the US Congressional midterm elections on 3 November.
Citing sources, The New York Times reported that the blueprint anticipates a brief but intense campaign.
As military units step up their drills, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth discussed prospective strike options with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The list of targets encompasses Iran’s nuclear sites, its energy infrastructure, and its arsenals of missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles.
Several officials who spoke to the newspaper argued that a new wave of attacks could deal a heavy blow to the Iranian economy, forcing the leadership in Tehran into concessions.
Conversely, other sources doubt whether a resumption of fighting would prove any more successful than the earlier campaign conducted between February and April.
That previous offensive drove energy prices higher and drained US stockpiles of interceptor missiles.
It remains unclear whether US President Donald Trump will authorise the operation.
Domestic political calculations in Israel could also influence the trajectory of the plans, given that the country faces general elections on 27 October.
While some experts speaking to the newspaper contended that Netanyahu could leverage the threat of war to form a national unity government, others pointed to the opposition’s distrust of the prime minister.
Washington fears regional spillover
The US administration also harbours concerns that the fighting could engulf the wider region. On Wednesday, the US State Department ordered non-essential government personnel and their family members to leave Saudi Arabia following attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis.
A US military build-up, comprising three aircraft carriers, fighter aircraft, and special forces units, is slated to be fully deployed to the region by early November.
The targets under review include the deep underground nuclear facility code-named “Pickaxe”. Trump suggested that the high-yield GBU-43/B bomb, known as the “mother of all bombs”, could be deployed against the site, though experts doubt whether the ordnance can destroy a complex buried so deeply.
For its part, Tehran is preparing for a potential escalation, threatening to broaden its target list. Retaliatory options under consideration by Iran reportedly include data centres and subsea internet cables, in addition to shipping and energy facilities.
Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to an Iranian negotiator, dismissed US hopes of wrapping up a new campaign within 72 hours as a “fantasy”. Mohammadi warned that Tehran’s response would be more severe and unpredictable.
The Financial Times previously reported that an Israeli strike on Iran set for 10 October had been called off because the US president was unwilling to risk a broader conflict ahead of the Congressional midterms.
According to that report, the Israeli military had prepared a multi-day assault on nuclear sites, Iranian government targets, power plants, and civilian infrastructure on Netanyahu’s orders. The strikes had been designed to exceed the intensity of the campaign begun in February.
Washington seeks to secure an agreement from Tehran covering both the Strait of Hormuz and its nuclear programme.
“It will either be a deal or a strike,” one source told the Financial Times, adding that an operation could get under way in the coming weeks.
Another official who spoke to the paper suggested that Israeli preparations might serve as leverage to squeeze Iran in negotiations.
Axios also reported that the Pentagon had issued orders to prepare for renewed strikes, though the directive contained no specific date and Trump has yet to take a final decision.
The US and Israel launched their offensive against Iran on 28 February. Iran hit back by targeting US and Israeli assets across the region and curbing vessel transit through the Strait of Hormuz.
Although both sides signed a memorandum of understanding in June that provided for a ceasefire and talks to lift the blockade in the Strait of Hormuz, reciprocal attacks between the US and Iran have persisted.
Middle East
Netanyahu trails Eisenkot in Israeli polls despite Trump backing
As general elections scheduled for 27 October approach in Israel, the opposition camp led by former Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot continues to lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in public opinion polls.
Survey data published in the Israeli press on 19 and 20 October reveal that the governing coalition has failed to catch the opposition, despite explicit backing from US President Donald Trump.
However, the current distribution of votes documents that neither wing can reach a governing majority on its own.
Netanyahu reaches 61 seats in Channel 14’s latest poll. He doesn’t in i24’s.
Both give him a stronger position than Kan and Maariv. Likud gets 29 seats in Channel 14, 25 in i24, 21 in Kan and 18 in Maariv.
Count the same five lists—Likud, Shas, United Torah Judaism, Otzma… pic.twitter.com/Qb0fCq0qdK
— Zvika Klein צביקה קליין (@ZvikaKlein) October 19, 2026
Neither bloc reaches the 61 seats needed to form a government
According to a survey conducted by Channel 13, if an election were held today, Eisenkot’s bloc would win 51 seats, while the Netanyahu coalition would take 50.
A Channel 12 poll indicates that the gap has widened slightly, projecting 55 seats for Eisenkot’s alliance and 51 for the governing bloc. A minimum of 61 seats is required to form a government in the Knesset, Israel’s 120-seat parliament.
A key factor deadlocking the political arithmetic is the refusal by both sides to form a coalition with parties representing Palestinian citizens of Israel. This stance stands as the most tangible obstacle to securing a parliamentary majority after the election.
Channel 12 data shows that overall voter turnout is expected to remain at 72%. The inclination to head to the ballot box climbs to 81% among opposition voters, compared with 74% measured among Netanyahu supporters.
The same poll notes that Eisenkot has widened his lead over Netanyahu by two further points in prime ministerial preferences.
Yashar party climbs after Gantz bows out
A survey published on the Walla news site shows that the balance shifted after Benny Gantz decided to withdraw his Blue and White party from the race. Following that move, Eisenkot’s Yashar party increased its projected tally to 23 seats, while Netanyahu’s Likud dropped by one seat to 19.
Eisenkot’s party and the “Zionist Opposition” bloc it anchors have remained atop the polls for several months.
In an earlier message of support, Trump praised Netanyahu as “a great fighting prime minister and an even greater partner for peace.” Public opinion polls document that this diplomatic and political backing has not proved sufficient to tip the preferences of the Israeli electorate in favour of the incumbent government.
Support for Ben Gvir rises among young voters
Although Netanyahu’s alliance trails in overall strength, far-right figures within the coalition appear to be expanding their grassroots base. Gauged interest in the Jewish Power party of Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir is climbing, particularly among younger voters.
Speaking to a study conducted by Agam Labs, affiliated with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, an 18-year-old student described his shifting preference: “I used to think he was a bit crazy, but then I actually looked at what he was saying, and it all made sense.”
Another Israeli citizen stated that Ben Gvir’s push to arm West Bank settlers gave them “room to breathe.”
Ben Gvir is known for leading settler incursions into the Al-Aqsa compound and distributing military-grade rifles to tens of thousands of settlers since 7 October 2023.
Criticized for escalating violence against Palestinians, Ben Gvir has called for starving Gaza, maintaining military operations in Lebanon, and bombing Beirut. The far-right minister’s militaristic stances also find a political constituency across several opposition parties in Israel.
-
Europe2 weeks agoBerlin Left Party backs Israel’s right to exist for coalition pact
-
Russia2 weeks ago71 EU lawmakers demand closure of Russian Houses in 15 member states
-
Europe2 weeks agoMI6 investigates potential leaks after former BND chief is detained
-
Russia2 weeks agoUS and Russian figures discuss American stake in Nord Stream lines
-
Russia2 weeks agoDrone strike shuts down Yandex data centre in Russia’s Ryazan region
-
America2 weeks agoTrump weighs presidential memorandum to cut surging US diesel prices
-
Europe2 weeks agoEU and allies pull conference backing after US pressure over panel
-
Diplomacy1 week agoSWP urges backing for Gulf trade routes bypassing Strait of Hormuz
