When Shabak Replaces Mossad: Netanyahu’s Calculated Message to Doha and Washington

Posted on by Elijah J Magnier

By Elijah J. Magnier –

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced responsibility for the unlawful attack on a sovereign country, Qatar, his statement drew attention for two reasons. First, the speed of his acknowledgement contrasted sharply with Israel’s decades-long reliance on deniability and media leaks to insinuate its role in covert actions. For assassinations, sabotage missions, or cyber operations abroad, the Israeli formula was always the same: silence at the official level, “anonymous sources” to foreign correspondents, and a carefully cultivated aura of mystery. By stepping in front of the cameras almost immediately, Netanyahu broke with a long tradition that had served Israel diplomatically and strategically.

Second, the way he described the operation was even more striking. Netanyahu credited “the army, the Air Force, and the Shabak” for the strike. Missing was the Mossad, the agency that by law and mandate carries responsibility for intelligence and covert action abroad. In Israel’s security architecture, roles are clearly delineated: Mossad for external operations, Shabak for internal security, AMAN for military intelligence, and the IDF with its Air Force for overt operations. The omission of Mossad from a mission that took place in Qatar, a US ally hosting the largest American airbase in the Middle East and an important political mediator with Hamas, was not a slip of the tongue. Netanyahu is known for calculated messaging. His words are chosen to address multiple audiences: Hebrew for the domestic front, English for foreign capitals. In this case, the exclusion of Mossad raises several possible explanations, each with far-reaching implications.

Subscribe to get access

Read more of this content when you subscribe today.

Subscribe
Advertisements
Advertisements
Advertisements

Published by Elijah J Magnier

Elijah J. Magnier is a veteran war correspondent and analyst specialising in military affairs, intelligence, strategic affairs and political risk. He has spent nearly four decades living and reporting inside countries at war, often from the front lines, while developing long-standing access to political leaders, military and intelligence officials, diplomats, armed non-state actors and communities directly affected by conflict. His field experience includes the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the Iran–Iraq War, the Lebanese Civil War, the 1991 Gulf War, the wars in the former Yugoslavia, conflict in Sudan, the war in Afghanistan and Yemen, the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq and its aftermath, the 2006 Lebanon War, and the wars in Libya and Syria. He has lived for extended periods in Lebanon, Bosnia, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Syria, allowing him to follow conflicts, political transformations and regional networks beyond the limitations of short-term war reporting. His work focuses on warfare and deterrence, terrorism and counterterrorism, intelligence, political violence, armed non-state actors, regional security and the relationship between military power and political outcomes. He has also served as an adviser to the European Parliament’s Rapporteur on Iraq and Lebanon. Magnier holds a PhD in Policing and Criminal Justice from Liverpool John Moores University and an MSc in Counterterrorism Studies from the University of London. He has undertaken advanced studies in terrorism—including terrorist ideologies, financing and counterterrorism—at the University of St Andrews; terrorism and counterterrorism at Leiden University; and negotiation, including international and cross-cultural negotiation, at ESSEC Business School in Paris. His work combines sustained field access with academic analysis of war, sovereignty, deterrence and political violence.