Liberman tells unofficial Oct. 7 probe he warned of Hamas invasion threat in 2016
‘Impossible to defeat Hamas and Hezbollah without overwhelming Iran,’ argues ex-defense minister; Sa’ar: ‘We underestimate the enemy,’ attack would’ve happened under any government
Sam Sokol is the Times of Israel's political correspondent. He was previously a reporter for the Jerusalem Post, Jewish Telegraphic Agency and Haaretz. He is the author of "Putin’s Hybrid War and the Jews"
Yisrael Beytenu party chief and former defense minister Avigdor Liberman told an independent civilian commission on Sunday that he had warned about a Hamas attack similar to that which occurred last October as far back as 2016.
“On December 21, 2016, I wrote an 11-page document and delivered it in the presence of the military secretary to the then-prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to the then-IDF chief of staff, Gadi Eisenkot, and to the then-head of Military Intelligence,” Liberman told the so-called civil commission of inquiry in Tel Aviv.
The former top defense official and current Netanyahu critic further claimed that the document’s warnings corresponded exactly with what happened last October, even if he had mistakenly believed Hamas would attack in late 2022.
Excerpts of his letter have previously been published by Hebrew media.
With Netanyahu repeatedly putting off the establishment of a state commission of inquiry to investigate successive governments’ failures that enabled the October 7 attack, several groups representing survivors of the Hamas massacres and the families of those killed recently announced the formation of the independent probe, which they have said is aimed at “reaching the truth and preventing the next disaster.”
Some 3,000 Palestinian terrorists, mostly from the Hamas terror organization, burst across the Gaza border on October 7 and massacred civilians and soldiers in numerous small communities in the region as well as at the Supernova music festival, while also committing mass rape, torture and other crimes, and kidnapping 251 hostages who were taken captive to Gaza.
“I gave two interviews, one to Israel National News, in which I said that Hamas was going to attack, and the last interview came out on October 6,” Liberman told the committee, stating that he had cautioned that Israel was at the time in a worse situation than before the 1973 Yom Kippur War, when several enemy armies invaded, similarly surprising Israel’s intelligence community.
“The prime minister was aware of all these things,” Liberman added, stating that Netanyahu had previously made similar comments regarding Hamas’s intent to invade Israeli territory during a Knesset committee meeting.
Liberman resigned as defense minister in November 2018, bringing down Netanyahu’s government, following a ceasefire between Israel and Palestinian terror groups in Gaza in the wake of an unprecedentedly fierce two-day barrage of over 400 rockets fired by Hamas and other terror groups at Israel.
Turning to Netanyahu’s handling of the current war, Liberman argued that “the prime minister does not talk to the defense minister, the defense minister does not talk to the national security minister” and that there is “a complete disconnect” between the senior officials.
“In a properly functioning country, the prime minister and the defense minister talk several times a day,” he said.
Liberman also warned that “it is not possible to defeat Hamas and Hezbollah without overwhelming Iran and eliminating its nuclear program.”
“Therefore, the more [such action] is delayed, the heavier the price will be. But it is clear that once there is no Iran, then you have neither Hezbollah nor Hamas,” he said.
Liberman, a right-wing former close ally of Netanyahu, fell out with him around 2019 and has refused since to join his governments.
He was joined in his criticism of Netanyahu by former security cabinet member Gideon Sa’ar, whose New Hope party quit the coalition earlier this year after he was denied a spot on the now-defunct war cabinet.
He has since been critical of Netanyahu’s handling of the conflict, accusing the prime minister of not being aggressive enough. Years ago, Sa’ar was a senior member of the Likud party, but is widely believed to have been pushed out by Netanyahu.
Addressing the commission, Sa’ar blamed what he termed 30 years of incorrect strategic thought “during which 12 years of withdrawals were followed by 18 years of containment.”
The handover of parts of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority as part of the Oslo Accords, followed by Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000 and from the Gaza Strip in 2005, all “allowed the establishment of terrorist armies on [the country’s] northern and southern borders,” he argued — insisting that last year’s attack would have happened even under another government.
“There was unanimity in the political and security circles that ‘goodies’ should be given to Hamas,” he said, referring to the transfer of Qatari money to the terror group as well as permission for Palestinian laborers to enter Israel from Gaza.
Turning to the Netanyahu government’s since-suspended judicial overhaul plan, Sa’ar stated that he had warned such a move carried “an increased risk to our national security.”
“Unfortunately, we underestimate the enemy and this is our historical lesson. There is a dimension of underestimating the enemy that is expressed in arrogant speech, and to this day we have not weaned ourselves from it,” he said.
Railing against leaks emanating from senior security forums, Sa’ar went on to note that he had opposed reaching a ceasefire with Hamas following Operation Protective Edge in 2014, stating that “Hamas’s military strength was less than a third of what it is today.”
Turning to the north, Sa’ar pushed back against the argument that Israel needs time to rearm and get its forces in order, stating that Israel’s enemies would use a lull to rearm as well.
Testifying before the commission earlier this month, former prime minister Ehud Olmert accused Netanyahu of silencing dissenting voices within the security establishment, leading senior officials to hold off from informing him of unpleasant facts.
“For 15 years, there has been a concept that any senior security official who says something [critical] becomes a target for slander and censure by the prime minister himself and his entire entourage. An atmosphere was created in which people do not tell [him] the facts and their opinions to avoid sparking fights that would undermine their status and ability to act,” Olmert claimed.
