What Went Wrong? Questions Emerge Over Israel’s Intelligence Prowess After Hamas Attack 

Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets launched from the Gaza Strip, as seen from the city of Ashkelon, Israel October 9, 2023. (Reuters)
Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets launched from the Gaza Strip, as seen from the city of Ashkelon, Israel October 9, 2023. (Reuters)
TT

What Went Wrong? Questions Emerge Over Israel’s Intelligence Prowess After Hamas Attack 

Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets launched from the Gaza Strip, as seen from the city of Ashkelon, Israel October 9, 2023. (Reuters)
Israel's Iron Dome anti-missile system intercepts rockets launched from the Gaza Strip, as seen from the city of Ashkelon, Israel October 9, 2023. (Reuters)

For Palestinians in Gaza, Israel’s eyes are never very far away. Surveillance drones buzz constantly from the skies. The highly-secured border is awash with security cameras and soldiers on guard. Intelligence agencies work sources and cyber capabilities to draw out a bevy of information.

But Israel’s eyes appeared to have been closed in the lead-up to an unprecedented onslaught by the Hamas movement, which broke down Israeli border barriers and sent hundreds of gunmen into Israel to carry out a brazen attack that has killed hundreds and pushed the region toward conflict.

Israel’s intelligence agencies have gained an aura of invincibility over the decades because of a string of achievements. Israel has foiled plots seeded in the West Bank, allegedly hunted down Hamas operatives abroad and has been accused of killing Iranian nuclear scientists in the heart of Iran. Even when their efforts have stumbled, agencies like the Mossad, Shin Bet and military intelligence have maintained their mystique.

But the weekend’s assault, which caught Israel off-guard on a major Jewish holiday, plunges that reputation into doubt and raises questions about the country’s readiness in the face of a weaker but determined foe. Over 24 hours later, Hamas fighters continued to battle Israeli forces inside Israeli territory, and dozens of Israelis were in Hamas captivity in Gaza.

“This is a major failure,” said Yaakov Amidror, a former national security adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “This operation actually proves that the (intelligence) abilities in Gaza were no good.”

Amidror declined to offer an explanation for the failure, saying lessons must be learned when the dust settles.

Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, the chief military spokesman, acknowledged the army owes the public an explanation. But he said now is not the time. “First, we fight, then we investigate,” he said.

Some say it is too early to pin the blame solely on an intelligence fault. They point to a wave of low-level violence in the West Bank that shifted some military resources there and the political chaos roiling Israel over steps by Netanyahu's far-right government to overhaul the judiciary. The controversial plan has threatened the cohesion of the country's powerful military.

But the apparent lack of prior knowledge of Hamas' plot will likely be seen as a prime culprit in the chain of events that led to the deadliest attack against Israelis in decades.

Israel withdrew troops and settlers from the Gaza Strip in 2005, stripping it of a close handle on the happenings in the territory. But even after Hamas overran Gaza in 2007, Israel appeared to maintain its edge, using technological and human intelligence.

It claimed to know the precise locations of Hamas leadership and appeared to prove it through the assassinations of militant leaders in surgical strikes, sometimes while they slept in their bedrooms. Israel has known where to strike underground tunnels used by Hamas to ferry around fighters and arms, destroying miles (kilometers) of the concealed passageways.

Despite those abilities, Hamas was able to keep its plan under wraps. The ferocious attack, which likely took months of planning and meticulous training and involved coordination among multiple armed groups, appeared to have gone under Israel's intelligence radar.

Amir Avivi, a retired Israeli general, said that without a foothold inside Gaza, Israel's security services have come to rely increasingly on technological means to gain intelligence. He said gunmen in Gaza have found ways to evade that technological intelligence gathering, giving Israel an incomplete picture of their intentions.

“The other side learned to deal with our technological dominance and they stopped using technology that could expose it,” said Avivi, who served as a conduit for intelligence materials under a former military chief of staff. Avivi is president and founder of Israel Defense and Security Forum, a hawkish group of former military commanders.

“They've gone back to the Stone Age,” he said, explaining that militants weren't using phones or computers and were conducting their sensitive business in rooms specially guarded from technological espionage or going underground.

But Avivi said the failure extends beyond just intelligence gathering and Israel's security services failed to put together an accurate picture from the intelligence they were receiving, based on what he said was a misconception surrounding Hamas' intentions.

Israel's security establishment has in recent years increasingly seen Hamas as an actor interested in governing, seeking to develop Gaza's economy and improving the standard of living of Gaza's 2.3 million people. Avivi and others say the truth is that Hamas, which calls for Israel's destruction, still sees that aim as its priority.

Israel in recent years has allowed up to 18,000 Palestinian laborers from Gaza to work in Israel, where they can earn a salary about 10 times higher than in the impoverished coastal enclave. The security establishment saw that carrot as a way to maintain relative calm.

“In practice, hundreds if not thousands of Hamas men were preparing for a surprise attack for months, without that having leaked,” wrote Amos Harel, a defense commentator, in the daily Haaretz. “The results are catastrophic.”

Allies who share intelligence with Israel said security agencies were misreading reality.

An Egyptian intelligence official said Egypt, which often serves as a mediator between Israel and Hamas, had spoken repeatedly with the Israelis about “something big,” without elaborating.

He said Israeli officials were focused on the West Bank and played down the threat from Gaza. Netanyahu's government is made up of supporters of Jewish West Bank settlers who have demanded a security crackdown in the face of a rising tide of violence there over the last 18 months.

“We have warned them an explosion of the situation is coming, and very soon, and it would be big. But they underestimated such warnings,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss the content of sensitive intelligence discussions with the media.

Israel has also been preoccupied and torn apart by Netanyahu's judicial overhaul plan. Netanyahu had received repeated warnings by his defense chiefs, as well as several former leaders of the country's intelligence agencies, that the divisive plan was chipping away at the cohesion of the country's security services.

Martin Indyk, who served as a special envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations during the Obama administration, said internal divisions over the legal changes was an aggravating factor that contributed to the Israelis being caught off guard.

“That roiled the IDF in a way that was, I think, we discovered was a huge distraction,” he said.



France Is Facing an Election like No Other. Here’s How It Works and What Comes Next

 Ballots are seen at a polling station inside the Petit Poucet school during France's crunch legislative elections at the Vallee du Tir district in Noumea, in France's Pacific territory of New Caledonia, on June 30, 2024. (AFP)
Ballots are seen at a polling station inside the Petit Poucet school during France's crunch legislative elections at the Vallee du Tir district in Noumea, in France's Pacific territory of New Caledonia, on June 30, 2024. (AFP)
TT

France Is Facing an Election like No Other. Here’s How It Works and What Comes Next

 Ballots are seen at a polling station inside the Petit Poucet school during France's crunch legislative elections at the Vallee du Tir district in Noumea, in France's Pacific territory of New Caledonia, on June 30, 2024. (AFP)
Ballots are seen at a polling station inside the Petit Poucet school during France's crunch legislative elections at the Vallee du Tir district in Noumea, in France's Pacific territory of New Caledonia, on June 30, 2024. (AFP)

French voters are being called to the polls on Sunday for an exceptional moment in their political history: the first round of snap parliamentary elections that could see the country’s first far-right government since the World War II Nazi occupation — or no majority emerging at all.

The outcome of the vote, following the second round on July 7 and a hasty campaign, remains highly uncertain as three major political blocs are competing: the far-right National Rally, President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist alliance, and the New Popular Front coalition that includes center-left, greens and hard-left forces.

Here’s a closer look:

How does it work? The French system is complex and not proportionate to nationwide support for a party. Legislators are elected by district. A parliamentary candidate requires over 50% of the day’s vote to be elected outright Sunday.

Failing that, the top two contenders, alongside anyone else who won support from more than 12.5% of registered voters, go forward to a second round.

In some cases, three or four people make it to the second round, though some may step aside to improve the chances of another contender — a tactic often used in the past to block far-right candidates.

Key party leaders are expected to unveil their strategy in between the two rounds. This makes the result of the second round highly uncertain, and dependent on political maneuvering and how voters react.

The far-right National Rally, ahead in all preelection opinion polls, hopes to win an absolute majority, or at least 289 out of the 577 seats.

The National Assembly, the lower house, is the more powerful of France’s two houses of parliament. It has the final say in the law-making process over the Senate, dominated by conservatives.

Macron has a presidential mandate until 2027, and said he would not step down before the end of his term.

A person casts their vote at a polling station in the Magenta district during the first round of France's crunch legislative elections in Noumea in the first constituency of the French Pacific territory of New Caledonia, on June 30, 2024. (AFP)

What's cohabitation? If another political force than his centrist alliance gets a majority, Macron will be forced to appoint a prime minister belonging to that new majority.

In such a situation — called "cohabitation" in France — the government would implement policies that diverge from the president’s plan.

France’s modern Republic has experienced three cohabitations, the last one under conservative President Jacques Chirac, with Socialist Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, from 1997 to 2002.

The prime minister is accountable to the parliament, leads the government and introduces bills.

"In case of cohabitation, policies implemented are essentially those of the prime minister," political historian Jean Garrigues said.

The president is weakened at home during cohabitation, but still holds some powers over foreign policy, European affairs and defense because he is in charge of negotiating and ratifying international treaties. The president is also the commander-in-chief of the country’s armed forces, and is the one holding the nuclear codes.

"It’s possible for the president to prevent or temporarily suspend the implementation of a certain number of the prime minister’s projects, since he has the power to sign or not sign the government’s ordinances or decrees," Garrigues added.

"Yet the prime minister has the power to submit these ordinances and decrees to a vote of the National Assembly, thus overriding the president’s reluctance," he noted.

A car drives past electoral posters, Thursday, June 27, 2024 in Strasbourg, eastern France. (AP)

Who leads defense and foreign policies? During previous cohabitations, defense and foreign policies were considered the informal "reserved field" of the president, who was usually able to find compromises with the prime minister to allow France to speak with one voice abroad.

Yet today, both the far-right and the leftist coalition's views in these areas differ radically from Macron’s approach and would likely be a subject of tension during a potential cohabitation.

According to the Constitution, while "the president is the head of the military, it's the prime minister who has the armed forces at his disposal," Garrigues said.

"In the diplomatic field also, the president’s perimeter is considerably restricted," Garrigues added.

The National Rally’s president, Jordan Bardella, said that if he were to become prime minister, he would oppose sending French troops to Ukraine — a possibility Macron has not ruled out. Bardella also said he would refuse French deliveries of long-range missiles and other weaponry capable of striking targets within Russia itself.

If the leftist coalition was to win the elections, it could disrupt France's diplomatic efforts in the Middle East.

The New Popular Front's platform plans to "immediately recognize the Palestinian state" and "break with the French government’s guilty support" for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government.

Macron previously argued the recognition of the Palestinian state should take place at a "useful moment," suggesting the Israel-Hamas war doesn't not allow such a move at the moment.

French member of parliament and previous candidate for French presidential election Marine Le Pen (R) attends French extreme right party Rassemblement National (RN, National Front) press conference ahead of legislative elections, Paris, France, 24 June 2024. (EPA)

What happens if there's no majority? The president can name a prime minister from the parliamentary group with the most seats at the National Assembly — this was the case of Macron’s own centrist alliance since 2022.

Yet the National Rally already said it would reject such an option, because it would mean a far-right government could soon be overthrown through a no-confidence vote if other political parties join together.

The president could try to build a broad coalition from the left to the right, an option that sounds unlikely, given the political divergences.

Experts say another complex option would be to appoint "a government of experts" unaffiliated with political parties but which would still need to be accepted by a majority at the National Assembly. Such a government would likely deal mostly with day-to-day affairs rather than implementing major reforms.

If political talks take too long amid summer holidays and the July 26-Aug. 11 Olympics in Paris, Garrigues said a "transition period" is not ruled out, during which Macron's centrist government would "still be in charge of current affairs," pending further decisions.

"Whatever the National Assembly looks like, it seems that the Constitution of the 5th Republic is flexible enough to survive these complex circumstances," Melody Mock-Gruet, a public law expert teaching at Sciences Po Paris, said in a written note. "Institutions are more solid than they appear, even when faced with this experimental exercise."

"Yet there remains another unknown in the equation: the population’s ability to accept the situation," Mock-Gruet wrote.