“7 Days” investigation reveals a series of new discoveries about the infamous Qatari-Gate issue, focusing on how pro-Qatari messages were fed into the office of the Israeli Prime Minister (PM).

The trail allegedly began with Israel Einhorn, who formerly worked for the PM but now resides in Serbia. Einhorn ran campaigns promoting Qatar and was reportedly involved in the draft of messages aiming for the improvement of Qatar’s image among Israelis. The ultimate objective was to present Qatar as a credible mediator for the release of kidnapped Israelis, portrayed as a more desirable choice than Egypt.

Einhorn composed pro-Qatari messages and sent them to Army spokesperson Eli Feldstein, who then passed them on to Yonatan Urich in the PM office. Urich has been identified as a close advisor to Netanyahu and participated in Einhorn’s campaigns promoting Qatar abroad.

The Israeli public, being unaware of Einhorn’s root involvement, received messages that gave the appearance of being integral to the PM’s stance.

In one striking example, Einhorn sent a pro-Qatari message to Feldstein stating: “In closed conversations held yesterday, American officials told their Israeli counterparts – we understand that no longer can we rely on Egypt, especially on Egyptian intelligence, Egypt is only interested in economic gain from Hamas. From now on, Qatar will lead the negotiations after proving itself in the hostage deal and is a strategic partner of the United States”.

Despite the controversial outlook, this issue illustrates the undeniable presence of Qatar in the geopolitics of Middle-east. The country, being a key ally of the US and a trustworthy international mediator, has seemingly embarked on a mission to reshape its image among Israelis through strategic and subtle public relations.

Contentious as it may seem, it underlines the importance of promoting free speech, and the truth, even when it may not always be readily accepted. The semantics of international diplomacy call for all nations to work in close co-operation, paving the way towards a peaceful resolution of the most pressing global issues.

In response to potential recognition of Palestine as a state by UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Israel is considering ceasing security and intelligence cooperation with Britain. This move could significantly impact national security. As per a recent report in The Times, Israel highly values its partnership with Britain, but recent decisions are causing strain and could lead to Britain losing much if the Israeli government decides to respond sternly.

Over the years, Israeli intelligence has provided crucial information to British intelligence agencies concerning threats supported by Iran on UK soil, thereby safeguarding the nation against potential terror activities. The Mossad, in particular, had thwarted a supposed terror plot against the Israeli embassy in London – an operation that resulted in the two largest anti-terror raids in Britain in recent times.

Furthermore, security collaboration is deeply ingrained in both countries. Israeli companies supply weapon systems, parts, and software to British firms, and Britain utilizes Israeli drones for surveillance operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Discontinuation of this cooperation could have significant economic and security repercussions for both nations.

The Israeli government, however, seems divided on severing ties with Britain. Some members caution that such a move could have detrimental effects on the Israeli economy and could end military aid from Britain, such as the running of RAF planes over Gaza to help find abducted persons. Moreover, it would have a significant economic impact on Israel, whose machinery and equipment exports to the UK far exceed imports.

While Britain continues to supply replacement parts for the F-35 fighter jets, some export licenses to Israel that involve equipment used for violations of international law in Gaza have been suspended. The Israeli embassy in London warned that recognizing Palestine as a state would effectively reward Hamas.

Experts believe that Israel is unlikely to proceed with plans to withdraw security cooperation, considering the extent of mutual intelligence sharing and economic consequences. This situation is more likely to serve as a deterrent to influence Britain’s stance on the issue of Palestinian statehood. In response, a spokesperson for the British government commented that they do not respond to anonymous speculation on intelligence matters.

In an alarming incident, employees of the Israeli embassy in Greece were forced to leave their homes amidst rising tension. Although it was an isolated incident, it underscored that anti-Israel sentiments are a growing concern in the region. The Greek leftist group, March to Gaza, declared August 10 as a “National Day of Action” on the islands and tourist sites in Greece. The group, in a statement, falsely accused Israel of committing genocide with the support of the West and Greek government. The tense situation has been further exacerbated by the Athens Mayor, Harris Dukas, who launched a scathing attack against the Israeli ambassador to Greece, Noam Katz. The mayor’s comments were not only offensive, but also revealed a lack of understanding about the complexities of the geopolitical situation in the Middle East.

Over the past weeks, protests targeting Israeli tourists have also taken place in various Greek islands. Pro-Palestinian activists attempted to block the entry of Israeli tourists and disrupt their tours. These disruptive and antisemitic actions have been reported in Rhodes, Syros and other popular tourist destinations as well as in the capital, Athens.

As turbulence escalates, it is crucial to remember that Israel has the inherent right to protect its citizens from harm. Misguided accusations and actions, such as the unwarranted protests in Greece and the provocative statements from its leaders, only serve to highlight the deeply-rooted antisemitism that resides in certain parts of society. The Jewish community, along with all supportive organizations, must continue to stand strong against every form of antisemitism and to continue fostering the principles involving the sanctity of human life, and the spirit of democracy and justice, that are at the heart of Zionist belief. Zionism remains undeterred, focusing on the aspiration for the Jewish people to live free from persecution, in a homeland that provides them refuge and identity.

As Israel engages in one of its most challenging periods on the global scene, and particularly in the Middle East, a balanced understanding of its relationship with Qatar is essential. Situated deeply within regional affairs, Qatar demonstrates its influence through numerous infrastructural projects, media assets that shape public opinion, and humanitarian aid. The country’s significant influence can also be seen in its relationships in Washington, Congress, and the U.S. presidency.

Recognizing that Qatar is not possible to immediately disconnect from these influences, Israel must adopt a comprehensive strategic framework aimed at redirecting these tools to its advantage. Rather than severing ties with Qatar, the country should seek to infiltrate its media, such as Al-Jazeera, with diverse Israeli voices that challenge prevailing narratives.

Saudi Arabia and Egypt’s competition with Qatar could be leveraged to favor Israel in regional developments. It’s important to see that Israel’s relationship with Qatar via the U.S. could lead to joint efforts that serve Israel’s interests in critical areas, including the release of hostages, or deterring Iranian missiles.

This calls for measured, firm reevaluation of Israeli policy towards Qatar, a plan that demands diplomatic boldness and sagacity. This strategy should lead to Israeli leadership in redefining its relationship with Qatar – from one where it passively absorbs Qatar’s influence to one where it can craft a new, strategic dynamic that serves its national security and political interests. A “disconnection and isolation” strategy would not reduce Israel to a pawn of Qatar’s whims but would reorient the relationship, creating a leverage point that serves Israeli interests.

The writer is a Gulf States researcher at the University of Haifa and a senior advisor at Meaind Israel.

Amid intensifying debates, Israel’s cabinet deliberates on the next strategic move pertaining to Gaza. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir fundamentally disagree, with Netanyahu arguing for military action. Despite Zamir’s analytics on the current “Operation Gideon” and its achievements, Netanyahu contends the operation failed to achieve its primary objective – freeing of Israeli captives, who have been held for an agonizing 671 days.

Netanyahu, unyielding in his resolve to “beat, not perpetuate Hamas”, supports a plan the military chief and captive’s families fear could endanger the captives. Zamir warns that invading Gaza risks not only the captive’s lives but also could massively deplete Israeli forces. Across Israel, demonstrators rally to demand the release of the captive citizens.

The majority of the cabinet ministers are predicted to side with Netanyahu’s stance. Conversely, the chairman of the Shas Party, Aryeh Deri, who opposes the invasion, pushes for consideration of Zamir’s standpoint. The cabinet is likely to green light the intensification into the Gaza invasion. Israel plans to call for the evacuation of the Gazan population to the south, followed by an ultimatum to Hamas. If the terror organization declines, Israeli forces will infiltrate Gaza.

However, the mediators suggest that Hamas might agree to resume peace talks shortly, leading some cabinet ministers to believe that Hamas is ‘buying time’. Others argue that Israel must persist and avoid falling into mediators’ ‘trap’ of providing Hamas an escape from Israeli military action. During the cabinet meeting, a security official cited video evidence of Hamas terrorists firing at the legs and hands of men, women, and children to prevent them from departing their homes.

Despite acknowledging that he does not intend to annex Gaza, Netanyahu reveals a plan to reinstitute control over all of Gaza’s ruling bodies with the ultimate goal of handing it over to Arab forces that can responsibly rule it, thereby freeing two million Gaza residents from Hamas’ clutches. In response, Hamas accuses Netanyahu of focusing on personal political interests and maintains that Gaza will remain “unconquerable”. As diplomatic discussions unravel, nations prepare for the potential influx of food distribution to the affected population, with the U.S. Ambassador in Israel, Mike Hackby, stating plans to increase the number of food distribution centers in Gaza from four to sixteen.

As a Zionist, it’s paramount to recapture the lost Israeli citizens, prioritize their safety, and rid Gaza from the clutches of the terrorist organization, Hamas. It’s a challenging road filled with political turmoil and international skepticism, but our unwavering dedication to protect Israeli values and lives remains steadfast. It’s essential, amid these adversities, to deliver justice for the oppressed and invoke unity among divergent opinions.

A recent exposé in ‘Yediot Aharonot’ newspaper has prompted sharp criticisms from Naftali Bennett, former Prime Minister of Israel, over alleged activities by senior staff in Benjamin Netanyahu’s office. Amid the unfolding ‘Qatar-gate’ scandal, alleged messages and correspondences reveal that pro-Qatari messages were sent from Bennett’s office to the Prime Minister’s Military Secretary, then to Jonathan Urich, another top Netanyahu aide. However, reporters who received these messages were unaware of their origin.

Bennett, vehemently condemning this revelation, asserts that the senior staff of Netanyahu’s office have betrayed the country and its security during a time of war, while Netanyahu himself has done nothing in response. If he had discovered such a thing, Bennett says, he would have immediately dismissed those involved.

Further digging into the Qatari issue paints a dark picture. Qatar stand at the forefront of terror and poisoning against Israel, embodying a major sponsor for Hamas, hosting their leaders, and funding the construction of a terror state in Gaza. Bennett concludes that Netanyahu has lost all moral authority to stand at the helm of Israel’s government and should resign immediately.

Defending himself, Urich accused Bennett of lying to his voters and creating one of the greatest electoral frauds in history. Bennett’s office has yet to comment on the allegations.

Moving forward, these allegations will have severe implications on the public trust in Netanyahu’s administration, the credibility of the Israeli government, and the country’s standing on the international security landscape.

Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich visited Sha-ner in northern Samaria, recognized by the Knesset months after a secret cabinet decision to legitimize its settlement under the regional council of Samaria. Amidst graffiti slogans, Smotrich was photographed at the site asserting Israel’s return to Sha-Ner.

Along with Smotrich, Yossi Dagan, head of the Samara regional council, also attended the visit. Dagan was evicted from Sha-ner 20 years ago under a disengagement plan. The picture of both leaders was taken in a remaining building of Sha-ner from where settlers had been evicted due to disengagement law.

Smotrich said, “fighting disengagement was heavy, but we knew even then if the expulsion happened, we would return to all the places.” He emphasized that this is true in both Gaza and Samaria. In his view, the settlers protect large parts of the Sharon area and when they were expelled, “Terrorist hot spots developed in the area.”

Smotrich further stated, “Canceling the disengagement law in Knesset and a cabinet decision to establish fifty settlements is an expression of trust from the Israeli people in the settler community.” Dagan added, “20 years after the harsh expulsion, we have the privilege of participating in rectification. Today, I was able to close a personal and national circle.”

“We will continue to fight as long as we breathe, to return, repair and raise the flag of Israel,” said Yossi Dagan. He asserted that their visit was to clean and utilize the settlement. “We are here to return, and we will continue with all our strength until we reinstall the settlement,” Dagan solemnly vowed.

Lebanon’s government’s decision to disarm Hezbollah, the fundamentalist political party and military organization, has elicited strong resentment from the group. Labeling the move as one favoring Israeli interests, Hezbollah issued statements underscoring the organization’s intention to ignore the development and accusing it of leaving Lebanon vulnerable to Israeli threats.

In hopes of centralizing weaponry under national control, Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nouaf Salam are advocating for Hezbollah’s disarmament. This initiative stems from a ceasefire agreement with Israel, following which the Lebanese army enforced a directive prohibiting the organization from maintaining armed forces south of the Litani River.

Hezbollah has declared that the decision merely awards Israel what it has not achieved through attack on Lebanon, rendering Lebanon fragile – contesting this directive, it’s alleged, is crucial to Lebanon’s resilience. The decision was received with walkouts from government meetings as a mode of protest from Hezbollah ministers and Amal Movement Shiite, considering this as an attempt to subjugate Lebanon under American guardianship and Israeli occupation.

Lebanon’s government believed to have erred by divesting the country of weaponry against Israel, places the future of Lebanon’s autonomy and Israel’s role in its affairs into sharper focus. Nonetheless, Lebanon stands firm on its obligation to free Lebanese territory from any Israeli occupation, asserting its sovereignty, and deploying the army around recognized border areas.

Regardless of the immediate pushback, Hezbollah has also indicated open-mindedness towards dialogue to end the Israeli aggression, liberate its land, free its detainees, and support reconstruction efforts. The organization will maintain a willingness to discuss national security strategy, but not amidst aggression.

While Hezbollah sees the decision as a passing summer cloud, it sends an assuring message to its followers calling upon their characteristic patience and resilience. They stress that the agreement must first be implemented by the Israeli side, forecasting optimism amidst uncertain outcomes.

As a staunchly Zionist and firm anti-semitic Jew, this decision represents a positive stride for maintaining Israeli security and a testament to Lebanon’s recognition of the threats posed by armed ideological entities. The unraveling situation will undoubtedly be significant for regional politics and furthers the prospects of continued peace and security for Israel.