Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his right-wing allies did not wait long to exploit the armed operation, which was carried out by two Palestinians at one of the entrances to the city of Hebron in the south of the West Bank, to serve personal, security, political and electoral agendas, 4 days before the elections. Netanyahu personally announced that he had ordered an unprecedented war in the West Bank, which he announced its complete closure, pledging to hunt down all Hamas leaders in every place and time, before launching a stream of statements towards escalating the attack in the West Bank, including the demolition of Palestinian homes in the vicinity of the operation, the complete demolition of the neighborhood from which the two perpetrators emerged, carrying out widespread arrests, and destroying infrastructure, leading to the demand for the necessity of dismantling the Palestinian Authority, the Palestinians and their weapons, and preventing them from moving in the streets of the West Bank. External.
Netanyahu said that his soldiers prevented a major attack in the West Bank, stressing that he had issued instructions to the Israeli army and security forces to impose an immediate siege on the city of Hebron and prepare for a complete closure of the entire West Bank.
Netanyahu's statements came after he held a security meeting attended by Defense Minister Yisrael Katz, Army Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir, and other leaders.
Netanyahu wrote on “X” showing and threatening: “Our forces are working with reinforced forces to thwart terrorism, and are carrying out large-scale waves of arrests. We will pursue Hamas terrorists, their senders, and their supporters everywhere and at all times. "You have no place to hide."
Two Palestinians had arrived at an Israeli checkpoint on the outskirts of the city of Hebron in the “Farsh al-Hawa” area and dismounted a village distance away. Then they approached the checkpoint and launched an attack on the Israeli soldiers there, which quickly turned into a bloody clash that lasted 20 minutes.
Pictures and videos showed the gunmen beginning a double attack that ended with the killing of two Israeli soldiers, the wounding of three others, and the killing of the perpetrators.
An Israeli army spokesman announced that a squad leader and a sergeant in the Ari Battalion were killed, and three soldiers from the battalion were slightly injured in the attack.
Channel 12 said that footage from the scene of the incident showed moments of terror when soldiers and paramedics were heard calling for help, saying that the attacker had been shooting for 20 minutes.
However, the Israeli security services say that the attack was broader than that. Israeli security sources said that the initial investigation shows that the perpetrators wanted to reach the outer streets, but after they arrived at the site of the attack, and after they discovered that this was not possible due to the checkpoint that was set up there, they changed the original target of the attack, got out of the car and started shooting.
The sources added that the perpetrators planned to carry out a major attack against the settlers, and that their goal was to reach the main roads and continue advancing from them towards the Israeli areas (settlements), and a large amount of ammunition was found in their vehicle.
Zamir confirmed the results of the preliminary investigation and said that the perpetrators were “planning a major attack against civilians.”
According to Israeli army sources, there was no specific warning about the operation, but preparations in the West Bank were extensive. Only last week, Zamir sent paratroops into the West Bank, announcing that the army had entered a state of maximum alert.
This came after Netanyahu said that Iran, Hamas, and other parties were working to carry out attacks before the Israeli elections.
Israel is investigating whether the two perpetrators moved as an independent cell or received instructions from internal or external parties, and the Israeli security services included a photographer for a foreign agency in the investigation, after he documented the attackers during the exchange of fire.
Yedioth Ahronoth said that the Israeli army examined the photographer’s account to determine whether he had happened to be there or had received prior information about the attack.
While the Hamas movement mourned Hamouda Al-Jubeh (27 years old) and Firas Al-Jubeh (27 years old) and blessed the operation, saying that it was a natural response to Israel’s crimes, Netanyahu, Katz, Ben Gvir and others arrived at the site of the operation, declaring what looked like a war on the West Bank.
Netanyahu said from the site of the operation: “We will first work to destroy this place and change it radically.” We will do something unprecedented, which is to apply the successful and resolute model we followed in the refugee camps, which are strongholds for terrorists. This is exactly what we will do here in one of the Hebron neighborhoods from which the terrorists launched. We will evacuate the population, we will enter each house individually, we will remove the weapons, we will deal with and destroy all terrorist infrastructure. At the same time, we will tighten our grip on the cities of Hebron and Halhul. We will consider expanding this model to include other cities as well. “We will remove illegal houses along the roads at an accelerated pace, as this threatens our forces.”
Netanyahu added: “I will guarantee you something else; A large-scale Israeli military operation in the West Bank, the likes of which we have not seen since the Six-Day War. The Israeli army is ready to implement it, and we will determine its timing, but it is inevitably coming.”
Katz accused Iran and Hamas of trying to influence the elections, stressing that his forces would demolish the neighborhood from which the two perpetrators emerged, and the homes of Palestinians in the area of the operation, similar to what happened in the Jenin refugee camp.
Netanyahu and Katz's words summarize the maximum use of the operation to serve personal electoral, security and political agendas in the short and long term, and also respond to the demands of their allies among the leaders of the Israeli right.
Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich called for the start of a broad military campaign in the West Bank that begins with the dismantling of the Authority, and includes collecting weapons and pursuing militants, just as in Gaza and Lebanon. He said that he issued orders to immediately demolish Palestinian buildings close to the site of the operation.
Smotrich added: “It is not possible to accept continued adherence to a concept that will lead us, God forbid, to the next (October 7). “In the next government, this will be one of the first measures we will need to demand and implement.” Likewise, Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir, who quickly arrived at the site of the operation, said from there: “This thing called the Palestinian Authority must be dismantled. They must be dismantled. Movement on common roads for Authority residents must be stopped. The freedom of movement of the Authority’s residents is less important than our right to life.”
Later, all Israeli party leaders came out and praised the heroism of the army that prevented a major attack, and pledged to support and enhance security everywhere.
It was not immediately clear to what extent Israel could go in a war in the West Bank, but the army closed Hebron and immediately tightened its grip on the city, and launched a series of massive raids there, including in the neighborhood from which the two perpetrators emerged, and actually began a massive demolition of Palestinian homes close to the site of the attack. It also closed major checkpoints in the West Bank and around the cities in the north and center of the West Bank, completely paralyzing movement.
The Iraqi government is facing a test in its efforts to confine weapons to the state, with increasing fears of a renewed military confrontation between the United States and Iran, and the possibility of armed factions getting involved in it, which threatens Baghdad’s efforts to distance the country from a regional conflict.
These fears come at a time when American and Israeli reports talk about preparing plans to resume strikes on Iran after the US midterm elections scheduled for November 3, in light of the faltering efforts aimed at establishing a ceasefire.
This possibility puts the government of Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi before a complex equation. Preventing the use of Iraqi territory in any new confrontation, and maintaining relations with Washington, at a time when factions still maintain military capabilities and operational decisions independent of the government, according to observers.
Al-Zaidi had presented, in an interview with the New York Times during his visit to New York last September, a phased plan to confine arms to the state, ending on June 30, 2027, after the previous date set for that was September 30, 2026.
The plan, according to what Al-Zaidi announced, is based on a first phase extending for 90 days, during which the factions refrain from attacking American interests or neighboring countries, in exchange for American forces refraining from targeting them, before moving to gradually handing over weapons during the following six months.
But the announcement of the timetable did not end the disagreements regarding implementation mechanisms, especially with the continued refusal of influential factions to give up their weapons, and some of them linked this to the end of the foreign military presence. Also, the declared positions on arms control do not necessarily mean reaching a binding agreement on the delivery of heavy weapons or missiles and drones.
Talib Muhammad Karim, professor of political science at Al-Mustansiriya University, told Asharq Al-Awsat that the nature of the American strike and the extent of Israel’s participation in it will be decisive factors in determining the level of involvement of the Iraqi factions.
He adds that the expansion of the war to include direct Israeli strikes against Iran will make the transition of some factions from targeting American interests and bases in the region to targeting the Israeli depth “more serious,” which may open the door to mutual operations and geographical expansion of the confrontation.
Karim believes that the government's responsibility is not limited to controlling the factions, but rather includes preventing the use of Iraqi lands in war and protecting sovereignty and national interests in accordance with the constitution.
For his part, Ghaleb Al-Daami, professor of media at Al-Mustansiriya University, believes that the factions’ intervention, if the war is renewed, will be indirect at first, by targeting American interests.
Al-Daami told Asharq Al-Awsat that the factions declared their readiness to participate alongside Iran if the war broke out again, but they may find themselves in “trouble” if they choose frank and public participation.
As for Abdul Rahman al-Jubouri, a specialist in American affairs, he believes that the factions’ calculations do not necessarily coincide with the Iraqi government’s calculations, pointing out that the Hezbollah Brigades operate according to their doctrine, which is directly linked to the Iranian leader.
Al-Jubouri believes that “Al-Zaidi’s position does not bind these groups, and some of them confirm their commitment to the truce, but they have not changed their view of the United States as an enemy.”
Basil Hussein, head of the Kalwada Center for Political Studies, does not expect the Iraqi factions to deal with any renewal of the war between Washington and Tehran with a unified position.
Hussein told Asharq Al-Awsat that the factions most closely linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, led by the Hezbollah Brigades and the Nujaba Movement, may link their decision to Tehran’s calculations and expand their operations to include American interests and energy facilities in the region.
Hussein believes that the factions that have declared their commitment to confining weapons to the state, including Asaib Ahl al-Haq and the Imam Ali Brigades, will likely distance themselves, although that alone does not determine the nature of their position if the war expands.
He adds that the most difficult test will face the Zaidi government. Because renewed confrontation may give the factions that refuse to give up their weapons an additional pretext to cling to them, in addition to exposing Iraq to American and regional responses.
For his part, Abbas Abboud, a researcher and academic, proposes two possible paths for the factions: commitment to the agreement with the government, which is based on confining weapons first to the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, then handing them over in stages, or engaging in operations targeting American interests inside or outside Iraq.
Abboud warns that the second path may undermine the government’s basic program, saying that the factions’ entry into the war on the side of Iran against the United States will expose Baghdad to major security and political repercussions, and may drag the country into confrontation “against its will and its political decision.”
On the other hand, Hani Ashour, a political researcher, believes that “Al-Zaidi’s assertion that weapons are restricted to the state’s hands and that the decision of war and peace is assigned to its constitutional institutions reflects the official Iraqi position aimed at avoiding entering into any new regional confrontation.”
Ashour told Asharq Al-Awsat that the US-Iranian war threatens to mix the cards in the region, while Iraq is trying to distance itself from it as much as possible, especially in light of the difficult economic conditions it is going through.
He adds that the government will not, in his estimation, allow the factions to engage in war under any pretext, noting that a number of them have already announced that their weapons are restricted to the state.
However, this estimate remains dependent on the government’s ability to transform political positions into actual measures, in light of the factions’ differing positions regarding handing over weapons, and the continuing disagreement over the timing and conditions of implementation.
In this context, Falah Al-Mishaal, a researcher in political affairs, believes that the government’s warnings directed to those who promote weapons outside the scope of the state are consistent with Al-Zaidi’s ministerial approach, noting that legal procedures related to incitement or terrorist acts may be punished by death, according to the laws in force.
The prosecution department expanded into the file of the Hezbollah explosives shipment, with the issuance of search and investigation warrants against two people who went into hiding after being summoned for investigation, while Army Intelligence and the Information Division continue to scrutinize data extracted from phones related to the case, amid the continued inability to bring in party officials against whom two subpoena warrants had previously been issued, and the party’s refusal to hand over the wanted persons and its demand to recover the truck and its cargo.
Initial investigations are accompanied by decisions commensurate with their developments, and a judicial source revealed to Asharq Al-Awsat that the government commissioner at the military court, Judge Claude Ghanem, “wrote two search and investigation notes against the wife of the arrested person, Haitham Amhaz, and the owner of the truck that transported the explosives, after they were summoned for investigation before the Intelligence Directorate of the Lebanese Army, but they refused to attend and disappeared from sight.” He stressed that the investigation “witnessed progress in identifying new names suspected of being related to the explosives shipment.”
This measure represents a new development in the course of the security investigation, which is still pursuing information related to the shipment and the persons associated with its transportation. It also adds two names to the circle of wanted persons, at a time when the two subpoenas issued against party officials known as “Sajid” and “Zulfiqar” were not implemented.
Despite the developments in the case, the party is still demanding that the state return the truck and its load of explosives, in parallel with its refusal to allow its wanted officials and members to appear before the investigation. He was not satisfied with this rejection, but rather raised his level of challenge to the Lebanese state, as he considered that “any attempt to arrest an official or an element affiliated with him will be treated as an Israeli aggression.”
On the other hand, the judicial source confirmed that the preliminary investigation “is continuing in the two approved tracks, before the Lebanese Army Intelligence and the Information Division of the Internal Security Forces, which indicates the continuation of work on the file despite the absence of the summoned persons.” The source did not link the continuation of the investigation to the extradition of the wanted persons, but rather stressed that “the procedures are still ongoing until their end.”
He explained that emptying the phones of the detainees, Ali Al-Kurdi and Haitham Amhaz, in addition to the phone of the latter’s wife, “provided information that is being verified and interrupted with specific data.” He said: “This information remains under scrutiny, without announcing final results regarding it, or determining what subsequent actions may result from it.”
Checking phones becomes important, in light of the inability to listen to wanted persons. The source indicated that its importance “lies in the content of the communications or the nature of the connections that investigators are investigating.” He added, "There is no doubt that there is important information that has been available and is under scrutiny, to determine the responsibility of every person who has a specific connection or relationship with this shipment."
