The relationship between the UAE and Israel has come under renewed scrutiny amid changing security dynamics in the Gulf and regional and diplomatic pressure on Netanyahu. An analysis by Associate Professor Necmettin Acar, head of the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Mardin Artuklu University, examines together the allegation that Netanyahu was warned before October 7, 2023, preparations by Western countries to sanction illegal settlements in the West Bank, and Israel’s election process.
Alleged warning before October 7
According to the allegation, UAE President Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan held an encrypted phone call with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about 10 days before the October 7 attack. The allegation says Netanyahu was warned that Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar was preparing a major operation described as an “earthquake.”
The call allegedly took place after an official serving at the UAE Embassy in Israel contacted Netanyahu’s office through a private phone. Netanyahu allegedly linked a possible Hamas operation to the West Bank and said Israel was prepared for every scenario.
The analysis also alleges that Netanyahu did not share the information with the then-heads of the Shin Bet, Mossad or the Israel Defense Forces. The same warning was allegedly conveyed to then-CIA Director William J. Burns.
Netanyahu and Likud reject the allegations
Netanyahu described the allegations that a warning was issued before October 7 as an “absolute lie” and a “conspiracy.” Netanyahu, who announced that he would sue Haaretz, argued that the report had been fabricated to help win the election.
The Likud party alleged that Muhammed Dahlan, a Palestinian politician living in the UAE, was behind the claim. The analysis says Dahlan holds an important position in the diplomatic channels between the UAE and Israel and argues that it is unlikely the information was leaked to the public without Abu Dhabi’s knowledge.
UAE statement does not directly confirm the warning
The UAE said that institutions in the country and Israel have maintained open and direct lines of communication for more than five years. The statement said that intelligence is shared between the relevant institutions when necessary. However, it neither directly confirmed nor denied the allegation that Netanyahu had been warned.
Associate Professor Necmettin Acar assessed that this stance may reflect the UAE’s efforts to adapt to a changing regional security architecture. The analysis argues that the message conveyed through Dahlan may have represented the delivery, through a political actor, of a warning Abu Dhabi might have found difficult to transmit through official channels.
Abu Dhabi seeks communication with Türkiye
The UAE’s release of Egyptian writer Abdurrahman Yusuf al-Qaradawi on September 4, 2026, was considered in the analysis one of the signs of a shift in regional orientation. In a video message he released, Qaradawi thanked Türkiye and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, describing Erdoğan as a leader who stands on the right side of history.
The same assessment says that Türkiye’s Foreign Ministry and intelligence services played a decisive role in Qaradawi’s release. The development may signal that the UAE is seeking to establish a new channel of communication with Türkiye and diversify its regional security options.
The Abraham Accords signed by the UAE and Israel were considered an important economic and security foundation for Abu Dhabi. However, the analysis argues that this foundation has begun to be questioned because of the war in the region, developments in the Strait of Hormuz and attacks on Gulf oil facilities.
The UAE’s swift denial of Netanyahu’s secret visit after he made it public in May 2026 was also cited as an example of the fragility of ties between the two countries.
Election calendar increases pressure on Netanyahu
Britain-led decisions by Spain, France, the Netherlands and other Western countries to impose sanctions on illegal settlements in the West Bank were listed among the elements of diplomatic pressure on Netanyahu.
U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s statement that the United States could not subordinate its Middle East policy to Israel, and his description of U.S. President Donald Trump as the leader most willing to break with Netanyahu in a conflict of interests, were also assessed within this context of pressure.
Developments emerging weeks before the elections planned in Israel for October 27 were alleged to signal preparations for the post-Netanyahu period. Opposition figures Gadi Eisenkot, Naftali Bennett, Avigdor Lieberman and Yair Golan called in a joint statement for an investigation into intelligence warnings issued before October 7.
The analysis says that some senior figures in the security establishment stated that security agencies had not been informed of the relevant intelligence. These developments could narrow Netanyahu’s political room for maneuver with international and regional actors.
The assessment argues that the UAE is keeping open the possibility of moving closer to a new security framework said to involve Türkiye, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Gulf countries may be seeking more predictable relations with an Israeli government after Netanyahu.
