Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December 2000, Page
51
Special Report
How Are the Mighty Fallen! U.S. Ambassador to Israel
Martin Indyk’s Lost (and Found) Security Clearance
By Andrew I. Killgore
Martin Indyk, America’s ambassador to Israel, is a Zionist. Israeli
newspapers reported that Indyk declared himself such when he went
to Israel in 1995 as the first American Jewish ambassador to the
Jewish state.
Indyk’s security clearance was lifted by the State Department in
September for “suspected violations” of security standards. Despite
its restoration in October, a thousand questions arise—along with
a sense of astonished awe that such a high-flying star in the Zionist
apparat currently dominating Washington could fall to earth,
even temporarily. Moreover, the post-restoration ambassador kept
such a low profile at October’s Sharm el-Sheikh summit as to be
virtually invisible.
Born in London and reared and educated in Australia, Indyk already
held high academic and intelligence positions “down under” before
moving to Israel. There he is said to have worked for right-wing
Likud Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir.
But it was in America’s capital that Indyk—former deputy director
of research at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC),
Israel’s Washington, DC lobby, and the first executive director
of the AIPAC-spin-off Washington Institute for Near East Policy—leapt
to a sudden stardom. In 1993 newly elected President Bill Clinton
appointed Indyk chief Middle East adviser on the National Security
Council. After having lived in New York and Washington for a decade,
Indyk benefitted from a speeded-up process, to acquire U.S. citizenship
only 10 days before assuming his new duties.
Following his first ambassadorial assignment to Israel, Indyk returned
to Washington in 1995 as head of the Department of State’s Bureau
of Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs. Then, in 1999, he returned
to Israel a second time as U.S. ambassador—reportedly at the request
of Israel’s new prime minister, Ehud Barak, the successor to Likud
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, with whom Indyk apparently had
little affinity.
During his suspension, Indyk was prohibited from reading classified
documents and was permitted to enter the State Department only with
an escort to assure he abided by his security restrictions.
No evidence was found of espionage or compromise of classified
information, assured the Israel-leaning New York Times and
Washington Post. Since Jewish American Jonathan Jay Pollard
was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1986 for spying for Israel,
this disclaimer has become standard, if misleading. But just because
unauthorized cameras or eyes perusing classified documents are careful
to leave no evidence doesn’t necessarily mean that spying hasn’t
taken place.
Indyk’s 1995 declaration that he is a Zionist exemplifies what
Georgetown University emeritus professor Hisham Sharabi calls the
“verbal paradigm” practiced by Israel and its supporters, obviously
including Indyk. The practitioners of this paradigm preserve the
premise that “Israeli and U.S. interests coincide” through rigorous
mental compartmentalization and a refusal to employ or even listen
to words that conflict with their basic theme.
Given that verbal compulsion, it would seem only natural for Indyk
to treat the Israeli officers with whom he has dealt over the past
five years in both Washington and Tel Aviv as constituting no danger
to U.S. interests—and thus to let them see classified U.S. intelligence
as a matter of course. That, in fact, is the very basis for Indyk’s
recent troubles, according to an article by Israeli military expert
Ze’ev Schiff in the Hebrew-language newspaper Ha’aretz.
The trouble with the premise that “Israeli and U.S. interests coincide,”
of course, is that it is not true. Israel has its own interests,
as does America. Pollard’s espionage resulted in some of our stolen
secrets reaching the Soviet Union. Indeed, the holy of holies of
all intelligence organizations—sources and methods—were revealed
to the Soviet Union by Israel via Pollard.
The intriguing question—assuming Schiff is correct—is why the Indyk
case surfaced when it did. Have some U.S. secrets that the always
aggressive Israeli intelligence service may have purloined or been
given by Indyk come back to haunt or damage the U.S. from a third
or fourth party?
If that is the case, and the “Friends of Israel” in the U.S. media
cannot keep it quiet, the abiding conflict between U.S. and Israeli
interests finally may be revealed. For its own interests, the United
States very badly needs that to happen.
To be watched closely.
Andrew I. Killgore, a retired career foreign service officer
and former U.S. ambassador to Qatar, is the publisher of the
Washington Report. |