Strike of 13 October 2023 in Lebanon: AFP requests precise and substantiated answers from Israel’s Ambassador to France

Mr Ambassador,

I am writing further to your appearance on the French television programme Complément d’Enquête, broadcast on France 2 on Thursday 4 June, in which you stated on several occasions that the 13 October 2023 strike in southern Lebanon was “a mistake”. You said in particular that “it was a mistake, clearly”, adding that the journalists “were not targeted because they were journalists”, but because “the soldiers on the ground thought they were terrorists”. When asked directly whether this amounted to a “bavure”, you replied: “Yes, we say it very clearly.”

In our view, these remarks amount to the first public acknowledgment by an official Israeli representative that the two strikes which hit a clearly identified group of journalists were carried out by Israeli forces, and are consistent with findings from multiple investigations, including those conducted by AFP.

AFP is seeking precise and substantiated answers regarding what you yourself have described as a “mistake”.

All responses provided by the Israeli military to our requests — most recently in October 2025 — have remained brief, stating only that the “incident” is still under review and that “the conclusions regarding this event have not yet been reached”.

It is therefore via a French television programme that we are, for the first time, learning of the Israeli authorities’ position, rather than through a direct response to our formal requests.

I would therefore like to submit the following questions:

1. Why has the position you set out publicly never been communicated directly to AFP in response to its formal requests?
    
2. To date, the Israeli military has made no formal acknowledgment of responsibility to AFP, to Dylan Collins, or to Christina Assi, a journalist who lost a leg in the attack and continues to suffer from permanent injuries. All are seeking justice. How do you account for this complete absence of official acknowledgment, given that you yourself clearly describe this as a “mistake”?
    
3. Investigations have established that an Israeli military drone repeatedly overflew the group of journalists in the 25 minutes preceding the strike, and that an Apache helicopter also passed overhead. If soldiers mistakenly identified these journalists as those you refer to as “terrorists”, how do you explain this prolonged surveillance without correctly identifying civilians wearing “PRESS” vests and helmets, in an open area, with a vehicle also marked “PRESS” and clearly visible from the air?
    
4. You referred to the discovery of vests marked “PRESS” in tunnels belonging to Hamas and Hezbollah as part of the rationale for the strikes. However, this claim has never previously been made by any representative of the Israeli military in this case. This argument does not in any way absolve the Israeli military, which struck a group of seven clearly identified journalists after prolonged aerial surveillance of the area.
    
5. The Israeli military’s response to our October 2025 letter stated that the incident remains under review and that the conclusions have not yet been reached — the same formulation used in December 2023. What is the current status of this investigation, two years on from the events? When will its conclusions be communicated to AFP?
    
6. Have the investigations conducted by AFP, Reuters, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders and the Committee to Protect Journalists been considered as part of the military’s internal review? If so, what conclusions have been drawn? If not, why not?
    
7. Following these public statements, what steps does Israel intend to take to ensure justice and provide redress for the journalists affected by the strikes?

Yours faithfully,
Phil Chetwynd, AFP News Director