The New York Times has said libel action threatened against it by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over an article alleging sexual assaults against Palestinian detainees by Israeli security services is "without merit".
It responded after Netanyahu and his foreign minister issued a statement saying they had ordered the "initiation of a defamation lawsuit".
It follows the publication on Monday of the article which claimed there was "a pattern of widespread Israeli sexual violence against men, women and even children" carried out by soldiers, settlers, interrogators and prison guards.
It is not clear how, or if, such a claim by the Israeli state against the US newspaper could be pursued.
Warning: This story contains descriptions of sexual violence
The statement issued by Netanyahu and Gideon Saar on Thursday accused the New York Times of "one of the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the State of Israel in the modern press".
Israel's foreign ministry alleged that the writer, Nicholas Kristof, had based his piece "on unverified sources tied to Hamas-linked networks".
In response, the New York Times issued a statement saying: "The Israeli Prime Minister has threatened to file a libel lawsuit against The New York Times regarding Nicholas Kristof's deeply reported opinion column on sexual abuse by Israel's prison guards, soldiers, settlers and interrogators.
"This threat, similar to one made last year, is part of a well-worn political playbook that aims to undermine independent reporting and stifle journalism that does not fit a specific narrative. Any such legal claim would be without merit."
There has been a furious reaction to the New York Times article among Israeli politicians and media.
Israel's ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter, posted a video statement in which he said "the only clear crime on display here is the violation of journalistic standards by Mr Kristof and his paper".
On Thursday, scores of Jewish protesters demonstrated outside the office of the New York Times in Manhattan, calling for Kristof to be fired.
In his 3,700-word article, headlined The Silence that Meets the Rape of Palestinians, Kristof wrote that "there is no evidence that Israeli leaders order rapes. But in recent years they have built a security apparatus where sexual violence has become, as a United Nations report put it last year, one of Israel's 'standard operating procedures' and 'a major element in the ill treatment of Palestinians'."
Kristof said his reporting was "based on conversations with 14 men and women who said they had been sexually assaulted by Israeli settlers or members of the security forces". The article carried first-person descriptions by alleged victims of sexual abuse, including rape and assault with objects.
It also included a claim by an unnamed person who Kristof said was a Gaza journalist that he was raped by a dog on the command of the dog's handler.
There have been extensive reports in recent years, including by Israeli and Palestinian NGOs, which have compiled evidence of sexual violence used against Palestinian detainees.
Last year, two Palestinian men separately told the BBC they were sexually abused while in detention. One of the men said a dog was used to sexually humiliate him.
The Israeli Prison Service said at the time that, in relation to one of the men, it was "not aware of the claims described", adding that "We operate in full accordance with the law." It did not comment on the second man's claims.
Also last year, five soldiers were charged with assaulting a Palestinian detainee from Gaza at Sde Teiman military prison, including one who was accused of "stabbing the detainee's buttock with a sharp object". The case polarised opinion in Israel, with right-wing supporters accusing the left-wing of using the incident to smear the security forces.
It later emerged that CCTV video of the incident had been leaked by the then-Israeli Military Advocate General, Maj Gen Yifat Tomer-Yerushalmi, leading to her resignation and arrest.
The charges against the five soldiers were dropped in March this year.
Lawyers in Israel specialising in defamation told the BBC that while there were ways the state could bring the case to court there, it would be challenging.
"In the State of Israel, filing a civil claim in this context has a low likelihood of success, given that the Defamation Law prevents the bringing of a civil action by a collective, and the legal system does not encourage defamation suits by governmental bodies as a matter of public policy, due to considerations of protection for freedom of speech," said Liat Bergman Ravid.
"However, the law does allow the Attorney General to file an indictment against the person who made the statement, but this is a rare event, bordering on non-existent."
Lawyer Idan Seger said that if the claim came to court in Israel, the newspaper would have to defend itself.
"Crucially, the New York Times would face a far more stringent burden of proof in Israel than under the US standard, as a mere lack of malice is insufficient to avoid liability," he said.
"To prevail, the newspaper must prove the absolute truth of its reporting or demonstrate strict adherence to standards of responsible journalism."
