On November 28, 1957, Mordechai Kedar was arrested immediately upon disembarking his plane that landed at Lod airport. He had never even considered the possibility that he was wanted in Israel for the murder of a Jewish undercover agent during his time in Buenos Aires, which he committed just before he was to be sent to Egypt to conduct covert operations. For three weeks, Kedar was held in a nondescript factory located near an orchard before he was transferred to Ramle Prison, where he was placed into solitary confinement.
Kedar was the first Prisoner X in the history of the State of Israel. Since that time, there have been more. Each one has his own individual story, each with a reason for being detained in solitary confinement. After the Ben Zygier controversy, we discovered this week that there is yet another Prisoner X. Predictably, some were shocked after being notified that we may have another Avner Israel case on our hands.
In 1954, Israel, an officer who held the rank of captain, passed information to the Egyptians. On a return flight to Israel, he was captured. During the flight, he died. His body was then thrown into the sea without his family being notified.
Like the Zygier affair, however, the family of the latest prisoner does know. The prisoner has also been able to see a lawyer. As it appears, this is another instance of the state trying to defend itself. Since Kedar and Israel, there have been more traitors and criminals who have come on the scene. Mordechai Vanunu and Dr. Marcus Klingberg are two notable names. They, of course, were not the only ones.
In recent months, the country has been rocked. The first time was when an Australian television news magazine aired an investigative report that revealed to the world the existence of Prisoner X in Cell Block 15 of Ayalon Prison. The local media was aghast because most of us didn't even know a thing about Zygier.
Soon afterwards, more details about the prisoner, who committed suicide in his jail cell, began to come to the surface. Initially, Israel seemed to be behaving like a South American country circa the 1970s. It later became known, however, that Zygier was detained with the full knowledge of his family, and that he was being represented throughout the legal process by a team of lawyers. As if that weren't enough, this spy drama took on a painful, personal twist. On the day that Zygier killed himself, his wife informed him that she wanted a divorce.
The crimes which Zygier is alleged to have committed remain a secret so as not to harm national security. This is why this young man from Australia was imprisoned in Cell Block 15.
This week, we bore witness to a new bombshell. As more information about the Zygier case came to light, we were informed of another Prisoner X being held in a secret jail cell. Members of Knesset and the press began wondering aloud what kind of country we were living in.
Meretz Chairwoman Zehava Gal-On demanded to convene an urgent discussion examining "the state's culture of lies." Gal-On was referring to statements made before parliament by Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch in the wake of the Zygier revelations. Aharonovitch told lawmakers that "in the State of Israel, there are no prisoners who have been made to disappear."
"In the State of Israel, there is appropriate supervision and adherence to rules and regulations," he said. "And, yes, there is also great concern for the security of the State of Israel. In order to address this concern there is at times a need to act with great secrecy."
Zygier's attorney, Avigdor Feldman, ignited the imagination even further on Tuesday when he told radio talk show host Nissim Mishal that the latest Prisoner X scandal was "without going into details, one that involves [crimes that are] much more sensational, much more incredible, and much more riveting."
Excessive transparency
Feldman claimed in the interview that whoever would blow the lid off of the case would be doing a great service, and not harm, to the state.
Is that so? Does the public really have a right to know everything? Has the State of Israel reached the long-sought-for quiet and tranquility? Does our regional predicament really allow for excessive openness? Is the state obligated to do harm to itself or to agencies charged with maintaining its security all in the name of democracy? Should a democracy risk its very existence so as not to hurt the feelings of journalists who didn't know -- or who did know but were not permitted to report about it -- or lawyers who offer commentary on these matters as they see fit?
MK Avigdor Lieberman, who serves as the chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, tried to restore a dose of sanity to the discussions. "After all of the nonsense that has been spouted about reports of a Prisoner X, Y, or Z, I would like to emphasize that the State of Israel respects the law, and all of these instances are subject to very strict oversight by the judicial and legislative branches through various subcommittees belonging to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee," Lieberman said. "The State of Israel protects the rights of all prisoners in accordance with the law. We are dotting the i's and crossing the t's in this case as well, even though we are dealing with a very serious instance."
Justice Minister Tzipi Livni also tried to put things in proper perspective. "In the State of Israel, there are no prisoners who disappear without a trial, without a defense, and without their families knowing of their incarceration," she said. "This whole uproar [regarding Zygier] and all of these attempts to make it seem as if the security services are taking people away from their families -- all of this is untrue and it's important that the public knows this."
A retired senior defense official told us this week that the latest revelations about another prisoner serves no benefit. "Aside from the story itself, there are perhaps more stories that would be better off if they remained in the realm of the unknown," he said. "It seems that in 2013, people are forgetting that we are in the Middle East, not Scandinavia. There are cases which can cause tremendous damage if details are revealed."
Like the first Prisoner X, the latest Prisoner X is alleged to have committed grave security offenses. In both cases, the families are aware of what is happening. The second Prisoner X has been given access to a defense attorney. In fact, the attorney is considered one of Israel's most prominent lawyers who by chance can also keep a secret, which serves the interests of both sides. Indeed, this prisoner also has family and relatives who would prefer that people know as little as possible.
The news media, however, democracy's watch dog, barked quite loudly this week. There have been claims made in the past against journalists who are suspected of passing information to their foreign colleagues since the details they had were not permitted for publication locally, only to later give prominent space to those same media stories from abroad for which they served as the main source. None of these individuals stopped to think whether a good story and ego take a higher priority than national security.
Like other countries, the State of Israel also has bodies and agencies that have been entrusted with upholding the security of its citizens. The means by which this is done -- including keeping prisoners in isolated jail cells far from the public eye and far from their families -- are not particularly pleasant. These practices have always alarmed those who hold civic rights and the values of democracy close to their hearts, and rightly so.
Let us take into consideration the case of Guantanamo Bay. Before he was elected president, Barack Obama vowed to shut down the detention center, especially after it was revealed that terror suspects held as prisoners there were being subjected to humiliations.
Not only did Obama refrain from shutting down Guantanamo, but his attorney-general, Eric Holder, announced two years ago that the U.S. would not try Guantanamo inmates in federal court. Instead, they would be given military tribunals in the prison itself. Many viewed this decision as a clear-cut case of American hypocrisy, especially when one considers that on his trips abroad Obama champions transparency, values, and respect for human rights.
This reflects the existence of two Obamas. The candidate Obama saw the Guantanamo detention center as a symbol that ran contrary to basic American values. President Obama, who in his role as commander in chief is briefed on intelligence information, opted not to shut down Guantanamo. He didn't have many options at his disposal. American citizens were less than eager to welcome terror suspects on their soil, while other countries were hardly enthusiastic about the prospect of holding extremists jihadists in prison cells within their borders.
It turned out that the "horrible" decision by George W. Bush, who in 2002 resolved to turn the American naval base bordering Cuba into a facility that would house thousands of detainees from Afghanistan, Yemen, and Iraq, seems logical, even natural. Obama, the champion of human rights and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, chose U.S. national security interests over respect for human rights. For America, one 9/11 seemed to be enough.
No naming names
This isn't the first time that the U.S., the world's biggest preacher of democracy, has found itself entangled in a crisis involving detention facilities. In November 2005, the Washington Post reported that American intelligence agencies were holding senior al-Qaida officials in secret facilities scattered across five erstwhile communist countries in eastern Europe.
The Post claimed that senior administration officials insisted that the newspaper refrain from specifically naming the countries in order to avoid harming anti-terrorist efforts there. Another reason was the fear that those countries would become targets themselves of terrorist attacks.
The newspaper obliged and did not print the names of the countries, but it did run the story regarding the facilities. It also reported that the secret network of jails was an integral part of the worldwide war on terrorism led at the time by the U.S.
The secret detention centers which are known to just a few senior officials in the White House and Pentagon are considered "black holes." The report indicated that over 100 terror suspects were sent to these facilities by the CIA for interrogation. Prisoners there are held in solitary confinement, and the only ones permitted to speak to them are CIA agents. This, too, is another instance in which the U.S. seeks to defend itself. Countries that have long forgotten what war means were shocked at the revelations.
Democracies in a state of war invariably run into this problem. Irrespective of what happens, it will always absorb criticism, win or lose. If it doesn't arrest the perpetrator, the traitor, or the spy that harms national security, lives will be at risk. If it arrests the terror suspect or the individual charged with harming national security, it will have to act in a very certain way for obvious reasons, only to be criticized by the righteous ones.
In reality, citizens are not so eager to relinquish their security, even on account of freedom and democracy. A perfect illustration of this was the recent scandal involving Edward Snowden, the former CIA employee who from his place of refuge in Hong Kong revealed how the National Security Agency was eavesdropping on U.S. citizens. Snowden also shocked British citizens when he revealed that they, too, were subject to illegal wiretapping.
Lo and behold, rather than turning Snowden into an American hero for uncovering how U.S. administrations, including Obama's, were infringing on the privacy of their citizens, the "victims" -- those whose personal conversations and e-mails were monitored -- expressed support for the surveillance program. For them, security is much more important than the right to privacy. It seems that the public isn't always in synch with the shapers of public opinion.
Ultimately, it is most likely a matter of time before Israelis are informed of more details regarding Prisoner X number two. It will be a bigger story than the Zygier case, more serious, more explosive. Yet, after satisfying our curiosities, the state will have to undo the damage not just to its image but also to its security. Those who know are those who need to know.
The man in the suitcase
In 1961, an Israeli citizen by the name of Mordechai Luk, who was 28 years old at the time, crossed the border into the Egyptian-ruled Gaza Strip. Like Avner Israel, Luk served in the Israel Defense Forces. As a result of his actions, he ran into trouble with the law. He was convicted on five different counts after it was discovered that he passed classified information to the enemy. Luk was even whisked away to Cairo, where he began to make propaganda broadcasts on Cairo Radio's Hebrew language service. He even offered to work for Egyptian intelligence, which agreed to take him on.
After an initial period of training and instruction, he was sent to Naples, which was to be his base of operations against Israel. Luk, however, proved to be a disappointment. The Egyptians, who suspected him to be a double agent, summoned him to a meeting in a coffee shop in Rome. There they drugged him, kidnapped him, and placed him under arrest at the Egyptian embassy in the Italian capital.
Luk was then placed in a suitcase that was supposed to be loaded onto a United Arab Airlines plane as "diplomatic mail." As the suitcase was about to be loaded into the belly of the plane, it began to make noises in Italian. "Help me!" and "Save me!" were heard by the freight loaders who were shocked to discover a talking suitcase.
The Egyptian protestations that this was a musical instrument were not convincing. Italian policeman opened up the suitcase and discovered Luk tied up. He was then extradited to Israel. On September 10, 1965, a district court convicted him of serious security crimes, including contacting Egypt for the purposes of passing on secret information.
"There's one major difference between the Egyptian police and the Israeli police," Luk told a Maariv reporter. "It's much more convenient being incarcerated here."
Indeed, being home is always the main preference, even if it's solitary confinement. This is particularly so for a protagonist in one of many espionage books written by British author John le Carr , the man who turned shadow wars into riveting reading material.
טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו