TEL AVIV, Israel — Israeli intelligence agencies had obtained a detailed Hamas battle plan more than a year before a devastating terrorist attack occurred on October 7. However, they underestimated its feasibility and threat level. This plan, known as “Jericho Wall,” was a comprehensive document outlining a methodical assault that eventually led to the deaths of about 1,200 people.
The document, which the New York Times reviewed, did not specify the date of the attack but described an intricate plan to breach the Gaza Strip's fortifications, seize Israeli cities, and target key military bases. Despite its precision and depth, Israeli military and intelligence officials dismissed the plan as overly ambitious and beyond Hamas' capabilities.
The Hamas attack, executed with alarming accuracy as per the blueprint, involved a barrage of rockets, drones disabling security cameras, and gunmen infiltrating Israel. Furthermore, the plan contained detailed information on Israeli military forces and communications, raising questions about Hamas' intelligence-gathering and potential leaks within the Israeli security establishment.
Despite widespread circulation among Israeli military and intelligence leaders, the plan was not taken seriously. It remains unclear whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top political leaders were aware of the document.
The failure to heed these warnings, as acknowledged by Israeli security officials, is now regarded as a significant intelligence lapse, akin to the surprise attack leading to the Arab-Israeli war of 1973. Underlying these misjudgments was a belief that Hamas lacked the capability and willingness to launch such an attack, a belief so entrenched that it led to the disregard of growing evidence.
So, What Does This Mean?
The overlooked Hamas battle plan and the subsequent attack represent a critical failure in Israeli intelligence and defense systems. This incident underscores the importance of taking potential threats seriously, regardless of the perceived capabilities of the adversary. It also highlights the need for rigorous analysis and preparedness in national security operations. The repercussions of this event have led to a reevaluation of intelligence practices and the acknowledgment of the necessity to remain vigilant against all forms of threats, regardless of their perceived likelihood.