October 5, 2026
Three years ago, Hamas carried out a large-scale surprise attack against Israel during which1,200 people, mostly Israelis, were killed and 253 Israeli and foreign citizens were taken hostage.
Since then, Prime Minister Netanyahu has been criticized for failing to foresee the attack, for not heeding the warnings, and for not taking the necessary measures to prevent it. During the past few weeks, with reports of warnings by the UAE and Egypt about an imminent Hamas attack, this criticism has gained a further dimension, creating a problem for Netanyahu ahead of the October 27 legislative elections which will determine the governing coalition.
Yet, the warnings about the Hamas attack have another dimension. They also demonstrate the progress in Israel’s relations with Arab countries.
In earlier decades, the Arab world was often referred to as the “Middle East and Maghreb.” In recent years, references to the Maghreb in the context of Arab-Israeli relations have been rare, largely because the Arab countries of North Africa are geographically distant from the heart of the Palestinian problem; they have been more preoccupied with their domestic challenges; and Libya has been excluded from the Arab-Israeli equation.
As for the Arab countries of the Middle East, the “Peace Treaty Between the State of Israel and the Arab Republic of Egypt” was signed in Washington in the presence of President Jimmy Carter on March 26, 1979, following President Anwar Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem in 1977, and the 1978 Camp David Accords.
In 1993, the “Oslo process” began after secret negotiations in Norway. On September 13, 1993, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Negotiator Mahmoud Abbas signed the “Oslo Accord I” at the White House. Israel accepted the PLO as the representative of the Palestinians, and the PLO renounced terrorism and recognized Israel’s right to exist in peace. A five-year period was to be followed by permanent status talks.
On October 26, 1994, the “Treaty of Peace Between the State of Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan” was signed between the two countries, with President Bill Clinton as the witness.
Despite the hopes raised by peace between Israel and Egypt, and Jordan and the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian problem remained unresolved, without any progress toward a lasting solution.
During President Trump’s first term, in 2020, the UAE and Bahrain signed the “Abraham Accords Declaration”.
Under the “Abraham Accords Peace Agreement: Treaty of Peace, Diplomatic Relations and Full Normalization Between the United Arab Emirates and the State of Israel”, the two countries agreed to “recognize and respect each other’s sovereignty and right to live in peace and security, develop friendly relations of cooperation between them and their peoples, and settle all disputes between them by peaceful means.” They also undertook “to take the necessary steps to prevent any terrorist or hostile activities against each other on or from their respective territories, as well as deny any support for such activities abroad or allowing such support on or from their respective territories.”[i]
A month later, Israel and Bahrain signed the “Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic, Peaceful and Friendly Relations Between the State of Israel and the Kingdom of Bahrain.[ii]
Sudan and Morocco followed the UAE and Bahrain in becoming parties to the Abraham Accords, although Sudan’s implementation and full ratification have been delayed due to internal conflict.
Finally, on November 7, 2025, the Kazakh Foreign Affairs Ministry officially announced its accession to the Abraham Accords.
While the Trump administration remains determined to have more countries join the Abraham Accords, first on Trump’s mind are Saudi Arabia and Syria. Among the incentives Washington has extended to Riyadh is the US-Saudi nuclear cooperation agreement.
In brief, during the past decade, relations between Arab countries and Israel improved despite the latter’s burial of the so-called “two-state solution”.
Apparently, there was more to come.
Two Arab countries, the UAE and Egypt, reportedly warned the Netanyahu administration of the danger days before the October 7 Hamas attack. Was the UAE warning a fulfillment of the obligation under the terrorism-related commitments of the Israel-UAE Peace Treaty? If Hamas is viewed as a terrorist organization, yes. However, although one may object to its methods, Hamas is a Palestinian group seeking to advance the Palestinian cause. How compatible was the warning to Israel with Arab solidarity with the Palestinians? Isn’t warning others about threats a friendly act? Aren’t the warnings evidence of closer relations between Israel and the UAE and Egypt? Yes, all of that was before nearly 80,000 Palestinians lost their lives in Gaza and settler violence in the West Bank took on new proportions, but such questions come to mind nonetheless.
There could be three reasons underlying the warnings to Tel Aviv:
First, groups like Hamas or the Muslim Brotherhood are anathema to Gulf dynasties and others who see them as a threat to their stability.
It is worth remembering that Mohammed Morsi was elected as the President of Egypt on June 24, 2012, but was ousted by the military a year later. The Brotherhood’s members were imprisoned, went into exile, or were forced underground. As part of a wide-ranging crackdown on political opposition, the Egyptian government has labeled the group a terrorist organization, as have Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Second, cooperation with Israel can pave the way toward a more comprehensive economic, commercial, and technological partnership. The Israelis on the flydubai flight were either Israeli tourists or members of the Jewish community living there.
And third, such cooperation pleases the US, and Washington remains the ultimate security guarantor of the Gulf states, despite the disappointments of the war with Iran.
Thus, a month later, the world will see how the people of Israel assess Netanyahu’s last four years as their prime minister, and whether and how they would weigh his alleged failure to prevent the October 7 attack against their growing friendship with Arab countries.
Today’s Middle East is not the region of five or three decades ago. It has changed. Countries of the Arab core, Iraq and Syria, face huge challenges, more questions than answers. The Arab League with twenty-two members is a non-entity. Relationships are more complicated. The Gulf states, which have been at the forefront of the Arab world in recent decades, are not united on every issue. This is why the UAE and Saudi Arabia are trying to put their differences behind them.
The October 7 warnings to Israel by the UAE and Egypt also tell something about Ankara’s relations with Arab countries, perhaps some unbridgeable differences with them.
Ankara should strive for regional peace, remain equidistant from all, and avoid entanglement in counterproductive partnerships. Ankara’s foreign and security policy should serve only Türkiye’s national interests, nothing more, nothing less.
Moreover, Ankara should not forget that internal peace and unity, none of which we enjoy at present, are prerequisites for pursuing broad strategic goals. References to Türkiye’s strategic location, growing regional power, and booming defense industry will remain empty talk until we re-embrace democratic governance and overcome our domestic challenges.
[i] https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/UAE_Israel-treaty-signed-FINAL-15-Sept-2020-508.pdf
[ii] https://img.haarets.co.il/bs/0000017f-e20a-d38f-a57f-e65ad4040000/92/e0/24c2d5eef4e2e79ba070212493e1/20201020-232926.pdf
