5 Myths About Jonathan Pollard Case

Facts Elusive as Israel Pushes for Release of Unrepentant Spy

getty images

By Jerome Chanes

Published April 02, 2014.
  • Print
  • Share Share

The Jonathan Pollard matter just won’t go away — and for good reason.

The most recent flurry of interest surrounding the case was fueled this week by the news that the White House might be moved, at long last, to release Pollard from prison. But the problem with the case — however troubling the case is for American Jews of many stripes — is that the 29 years of Pollard’s incarceration have been characterized by a pattern of innuendos, misrepresentations, half-truths and outright lies, with here and there a sprinkling of fact.

The following “Myths and Facts” will shed some light on some of the more difficult questions in the case, and will clarify some of the issues.

Disproportionate Sentence

Myth: Jonathan Pollard’s sentence was unduly severe relative to others who were convicted of even more serious crimes. Pollard is the only person in recent years, convicted of espionage, to be sentenced to life imprisonment.

Facts: First, under guidelines in place at the time of Pollard’s sentencing in 1987, a person who was sentenced to life was eligible for parole after serving ten years of the sentence; a person receiving a term of years had to serve one-third of that term before becoming eligible for parole. Sentences meted out to most persons convicted of espionage during the 1980s were harsher in reality than Pollard’s. James Hall was sentenced to 40 years; Jerry Whitworth was sentenced to 365 years; and so on.

Moreover, Pollard’s sentence was harsh, but hardly the harshest meted out to a convicted spy in the 1980s. That distinction went to the Walkers, who were convicted of the same crime as was Pollard. Arthur Walker: three life terms plus forty years; John Walker: life imprisonment.

Finally — and most important — comparisons between Pollard’s sentence and sentences meted out to others convicted of espionage are inappropriate. We, in the United States, do not have a “comparative system.” Each case is sui generis and is weighed separately based on the evidence brought in it. The quantity and significance of material compromised by the spy varies from case to case. Evidence in these cases is classified. There is no way of knowing the seriousness of the security breach in a given case.

Spying for a Friendly Country

Myth: The fact that Pollard spied for Israel and provided information to Israel that ought to have been shared by the American government should have been taken into account, resulting in a more lenient sentence.

Facts: First, as a legal matter, the law on espionage does not distinguish between allies and enemies.

Second, espionage conducted even on behalf of a friendly nation compromises national security interests and could endanger the lives of American agents. As one of the lawyers in the case said, “Spying for a “friendly? Once it’s out there, it’s out there — open to anyone, friend or foe.”

Third, the question of whether the classified information ought to have been shared as a matter of course between the two allies — America and Israel — is a legitimate one, but it is an issue that is appropriately worked out between the two governments.

The Weinberger Memorandum

Myth: Then Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger was a prime cause of Pollard’s life sentence because he inappropriately intervened in the case by submitting a memorandum exaggerating the severity of Pollard’s offenses.

Facts: As secretary of defense, Weinberger was obliged to submit a pre-sentencing memorandum assessing the damage, actual and potential, resulting from Pollard’s espionage. Weinberger concluded that Pollard’s crimes “demand severe [not ‘maximum’] punishment.” Weinberger did not call for the most severe sentence possible, or for life.

The Plea Agreement

Myth: The plea agreement, under which Pollard pleaded guilty, was violated by the government, and therefore Pollard should have been permitted to go to trial.

Facts: This is not entirely a myth. It has been long known that the plea agreement, which could have resulted in a lesser sentence, may have been violated. Indeed, Jewish communal agencies, citing this issue, called for the United States Supreme Court to review U.S. v. Pollard. The High Court declined to do so.

But at bottom, honoring a plea agreement is dependent on the judge. In this case, the sentencing judge was Aubrey Robinson (a good friend, by the way, of the Jewish community), who had a reputation as a “hanging judge.” No surprise, then, that he sentenced Pollard to life.

Jewish Organizations

Myth: The “establishment” Jewish groups were against Pollard.

Facts: Jewish organizations intervene in a matter such as this if there is a finding that anti-Semitism, discrimination, or civil-rights or civil-liberties abuses — all clearly threshold issues for the involvement of Jewish groups — are factors. National Jewish organizations, under the umbrella of the National Jewish Community Advisory Council, at the time scrupulously and doggedly examined every allegation of wrongdoing or injustice in the case. Open and democratic discussions — including with government representatives at the highest level, and with lawyers on both sides of the case, and with other interested parties — were held on the matter. Anti-Semitism and discrimination were not factors in Pollard’s conviction or sentencing.

But the issue is more basic. At bottom, it was not for national Jewish organizations to intervene in the case on the basis that it was asserted by some of Pollard’s advocates that he was (as the rhetoric goes) “a hero of the Jewish people.” Pollard was suborned by the Israelis, was well-paid for his efforts, and he committed serious crimes.

My own view is that Pollard should no longer be in jail. Pollard, misguided and misled, was a criminal, and he did his time. But the true villains of this drama are not Pollard or his ex-wife Anne, but the Israelis, who seduced, suborned, and corrupted Jonathan Pollard — and who shamefully slammed the door in his face when it was clear that he was about to be arrested.

But mythology takes on a life of its own — and it’s a long life.

Jerome Chanes was national affairs director of the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council and is a fellow at the Center for Jewish Studies of the CUNY Graduate Center


The Jewish Daily Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, The Jewish Daily Forwardrequires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, our spam filter prevents most links and certain key words from being posted and The Jewish Daily Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.





Find us on Facebook!
  • “You can plagiarize the Bible, can’t you?” Jill Sobule says when asked how she went about writing the lyrics for a new 'Yentl' adaptation. “A couple of the songs I completely stole." Share this with the theater-lovers in your life!
  • Will Americans who served in the Israeli army during the Gaza operation face war crimes charges when they get back home?
  • Talk about a fashion faux pas. What was Zara thinking with the concentration camp look?
  • “The Black community was resistant to the Jewish community coming into the neighborhood — at first.” Watch this video about how a group of gardeners is rebuilding trust between African-Americans and Jews in Detroit.
  • "I am a Jewish woman married to a non-Jewish man who was raised Catholic, but now considers himself a “common-law Jew.” We are raising our two young children as Jews. My husband's parents are still semi-practicing Catholics. When we go over to either of their homes, they bow their heads, often hold hands, and say grace before meals. This is an especially awkward time for me, as I'm uncomfortable participating in a non-Jewish religious ritual, but don't want his family to think I'm ungrateful. It's becoming especially vexing to me now that my oldest son is 7. What's the best way to handle this situation?" http://jd.fo/b4ucX What would you do?
  • Maybe he was trying to give her a "schtickle of fluoride"...
  • It's all fun, fun, fun, until her dad takes the T-Bird away for Shabbos.
  • "Like many Jewish people around the world, I observed Shabbat this weekend. I didn’t light candles or recite Hebrew prayers; I didn’t eat challah or matzoh ball soup or brisket. I spent my Shabbat marching for justice for Eric Garner of Staten Island, Michael Brown of Ferguson, and all victims of police brutality."
  • Happy #NationalDogDay! To celebrate, here's a little something from our archives:
  • A Jewish couple was attacked on Monday night in New York City's Upper East Side. According to police, the attackers flew Palestinian flags.
  • "If the only thing viewers knew about the Jews was what they saw on The Simpsons they — and we — would be well served." What's your favorite Simpsons' moment?
  • "One uncle of mine said, 'I came to America after World War II and I hitchhiked.' And Robin said, 'I waited until there was a 747 and a kosher meal.'" Watch Billy Crystal's moving tribute to Robin Williams at last night's #Emmys:
  • "Americans are much more focused on the long term and on the end goal which is ending the violence, and peace. It’s a matter of zooming out rather than debating the day to day.”
  • "I feel great sorrow about the fact that you decided to return the honor and recognition that you so greatly deserve." Rivka Ben-Pazi, who got Dutchman Henk Zanoli recognized as a "Righteous Gentile," has written him an open letter.
  • Is there a right way to criticize Israel?
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.