Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 1999, pages 43, 96

Defense and Intelligence

Public Opposition to Pollard’s Release Mounts, UAE F-16 Purchase Delayed

By Shawn L. Twing

Since Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s last-minute ultimatum, later withdrawn, to President Bill Clinton that Israel would not sign the Wye agreement without the release of convicted spy-for-Israel Jonathan Jay Pollard to Israel, articles, editorials, and scathing opinion pieces have been published in major American newspapers urging the Clinton administration to keep Pollard in jail for life.

The most recent volley came from four retired U.S. Navy admirals, each of whom had served as director of naval intelligence between 1978 and 1991. In an opinion piece entitled “Release Pollard at the Nation’s Peril,” published in the Dec. 12 Washington Post, Admirals W.O. Studeman, Sumner Shapiro, J.L. Butts and T.A. Brooks wrote: “We, who are painfully familiar with the case, feel obligated to go on record with the facts regarding Pollard in order to dispel the myths that have arisen from this clever public relations campaign aimed at transforming Pollard from greedy, arrogant betrayer of the American national trust into Pollard, committed Israeli patriot.

“Pollard pleaded guilty and therefore never was publicly tried. Thus, the American people never came to know that he offered classified information to three other countries before working for the Israelis and he offered his services to a fourth country while he was spying for Israel. They also never came to understand that he was being very highly paid for his services—including an impressive nest egg currently in foreign banks—and was negotiating with his Israeli handlers for a raise as he was caught. So much for Jonathan Pollard, ideologue!” the admirals wrote.

Other items about the U.S.-Israel relationship in general and the Pollard issue in particular brought by the mainstream press to the American public’s attention during the recent firestorm regarding Pollard include:

• “The [Pollard] case was a breakthrough for the FBI. Until then, its agents had been forced by U.S. policy to turn a blind eye to Israeli spying in the United States. ‘We would often catch the Israelis and then be told to let them go,’ said one counterintelligence agent.” (Washington Times, Nov. 16, 1998)
  
  
• “FBI officials counter that ‘friendly’ spying can be as damaging as spying for enemies, they note, as in 1967 when Israeli jets deliberately attacked the electronic intelligence-gathering ship USS Liberty, killing 34 Americans and wounding 171.” (Washington Times, Nov. 16, 1998)
  
  
• “‘Pollard placed at risk thousands of American troops and diplomatic personnel,’ said Joseph diGenova, the former U.S. attorney who prosecuted the case. ‘If people don’t think that is serious, then there is nothing I can do to help them.” (Washington Times, Nov. 16, 1998)
  
  
• “The full damage caused by Mr. Pollard remains unknown, in large part because of Israel’s inexplicable refusal to return the most sensitive documents he gave them.” (New York Times editorial, Nov. 14, 1998)
  
  
• “Justice was served by Mr. Pollard’s conviction and imprisonment and should not be upended to placate his sympathizers in Israel.” (New York Times editorial, Nov. 14, 1998)
  
  
• “As a sign of the difficulty Clinton could face if he commuted Pollard’s sentence, Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-FL), chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, said yesterday that any decision to shorten Pollard’s life sentence would be ‘outrageous.’” (Washington Post, Dec. 3, 1998)

Despite such widespread opposition to the release of Jonathan Pollard, and confirmed reports that at the Wye Plantation negotiations Central Intelligence Agency Director George Tenet threatened to resign if Pollard were released, President Clinton appears to be moving in that direction. In a move deliberately sidestepping the Justice Department, which traditionally has authority on matters like the Pollard case, the White House has asked for recommendations for granting Pollard clemency from several government agencies, including the CIA, FBI, National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency and State Department. Those recommendations, to be received by the White House by Jan. 11, most likely will be unanimously against releasing Pollard, as they have been each of the previous three times the issue has been raised during President Clinton’s tenure in office.

That may not matter, according to the Washington Times. It reported on Nov. 12:“Clinton administration officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity said it is unusual for the Justice Department not to be the lead agency in a clemency review of a major espionage case. ‘It tells you a political deal has already been cut,’ said a U.S. government official close to the department. ‘This is not going to be a serious look at the case.’”

UAE F-16 Fighter Buy Delayed

The estimated $6.7 billion sale of 80 F-16 multi-role combat aircraft and associated weaponry to the United Arab Emirates has been delayed, numerous defense publications reported, although the reasons for the delay have not been made public. After years of deliberation, UAE officials announced this summer that the F-16, made by U.S. defense giant Lockheed Martin, had won the contract, which was the last major aircraft buy of this century. Numerous issues plagued the discussions, particularly the type of radar the aircraft would have, its armaments, and technology transfer issues. The recent problems, which analysts say will prevent Lockheed Martin from meeting its 2002 delivery date, apparently concern “restrictions on the software codes for the aircraft’s electronic warfare system,” Jane’s Defence Weekly reported. Software codes are among the most closely guarded U.S. defense secrets and rarely are provided even to America’s closest allies.

Lockheed Martin officials insist that the deal has been postponed, but not canceled. “We just expect to close the deal early next year instead of late this year,” Lockheed Martin spokesman Charles Manor told Jane’s.

Delays in finalizing the UAE contract have not affected Lockheed Martin’s offer of the same aircraft to Israel, however. “The possible delay in the UAE deal is completely unrelated to Israel,” Lockheed Martin vice president in Israel Joshua Shani told the U.S. trade weekly Defense News. Shani failed to mention that the new, highly advanced radar system that is being offered to Israel for inclusion on a new batch of F-16s will be funded almost entirely by the United Arab Emirates and, according to industry sources, provided to Israel without a fee paid to the UAE for research and development, as generally is the case when new weapons subsystems are created by foreign purchasers and offered for sale to other countries. (For more on this topic, see: “UAE May Bankroll Next-Generation Radar for Israeli F-16s,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July/August 1998, p. 20.)