The Justice Ministry's announcement yesterday regarding the arrest of a Shin Bet officer on suspicion of "committing security offenses" crashed into reality this morning, as it emerged what actually landed him in the Shin Bet's underground detention on the eve of a national holiday. His attorneys, who were only hired after a long delay, opened a window into the darkness, revealing that the so-called security offenses were nothing more than two leaks concerning the conduct of Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar. One involved an internal search for Kahanism within the police, despite no evidence of such; the other followed our report on Bar's strategy for the Gaza Strip - dialogue with Hamas, humanitarian aid, and Gaza's economy as a means to maintain calm.
For readers unfamiliar with journalistic procedures, it is important to note that every story is vetted by the Israeli military censor, and anything posing a risk to state security never sees print. The fact that both stories had been approved by the censor significantly undermines the Justice Ministry's and Shin Bet's rationale for such an extreme arrest, especially of a veteran security officer held without due process or conditions. As for the content of the leaks: just as not every leak from the Atomic Energy Commission about the weather constitutes a national security threat, neither do the two cases at the center of this newly declared "serious security affair." Once again, it is evident that those charged with defending democracy are weaponizing "security" to justify extreme measures.
Revisiting Ronen Bar's strategy documents that we published extensively in 2022 and 2023, months before the massacre and in stark contrast to his claims about the government's directive to seek quiet and containment - it became clear that Bar himself pursued that same quiet and believed it could be bought. The publication of those documents did not harm state security; it merely undermined Bar's narrative ahead of a cabinet discussion on his dismissal. And if this does not constitute a security offense, but rather an investigation into leaks from within a security agency, then so be it. But why now?
I still remember how the attorney general repeatedly stated she did not wish to harm the press, and indeed refrained from investigating leaks that truly posed a risk to national security. Where was the Shin Bet when targeted leaks emerged from the hostage negotiation team, jeopardizing lives and potentially revealing Israel's strategic positions on critical issues? Where were these rapid investigations amid the nightly flood of leaks from every meeting of the Diplomatic-Security Cabinet? The timing raises serious concerns of selective enforcement, based on the nature of the leak and the damage it causes to specific individuals. A country where a security agency selectively applies the law for political purposes is not a country you, or I, would want to live in.
