Report Fuels Suspicion Over Aipac Probe

By Forward Staff and Jta; With Reporting by Ori Nir.

Published August 26, 2005, issue of August 26, 2005.
  • Print
  • Share Share

WASHINGTON — After a recently promoted State Department official was linked last week to spying allegations against the pro-Israel lobby, Jewish communal leaders are again suggesting nefarious motives behind the investigation.

The New York Times reported August 18 that David Satterfield, the U.S. deputy chief of mission in Baghdad, was one of two previously unnamed government officials who allegedly gave classified information to Steve Rosen, then the director of foreign policy issues at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Washington-based lobbying group. The State Department did not deny the report.

Rosen was indicted along with Keith Weissman, a former Iran analyst at Aipac, and Lawrence Franklin, an Iran specialist at the Pentagon. All three men have pleaded not guilty.

The indictment stated that “U.S. government official 2” — identified by The Times as Satterfield — spoke with Rosen twice in 2002, when Satterfield was deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs. According to the indictment, he shared “classified information” with Rosen, some of which Rosen, in turn, disclosed to a foreign official.

The Times reported that before Satterfield was sent to Baghdad, officials at the State Department asked the Justice Department whether his name coming up in the Aipac investigation posed an impediment to his assignment in Iraq. They were advised that Satterfield could take the job, The Times reported.

The decision to issue indictments against the dismissed Aipac officials, while giving Satterfield a pass, is fueling the sense among Jewish communal leaders that elements in the Justice Department — driven by anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish members of America’s intelligence community — were out to clip the wings of America’s strongest foreign-policy lobbying group.

“If, in fact, Satterfield passed on classified information that other people should not have had, then they should all be guilty of the same thing,” said Malcolm Hoenlein, executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

Neal Sher, a former Aipac executive director and a former federal prosecutor, said it was a “very, very serious question” why a person “who leaks information is not in trouble while the person who receives it is.”

“It’s very confusing,” Sher said.

But legal experts say that there could be reasonable explanations for the decision not to indict Satterfield or to block his promotion. The indictment against Rosen, Weissman and Franklin portrays an intentional and systematic pattern of sharing information that the three allegedly knew was secret — some of it highly classified — and of sharing it with foreign nationals. It does not suggest that the American official identified by The Times engaged in any such behavior.

“There could be more nefarious explanations” for only indicting Franklin and the Aipac officials, said Peter Edelman, a professor of law at Georgetown University in Washington. “But I’d be willing to bet you that that’s not the story here.”

Several current and former Washington lobbyists said that more than anything, the Justice Department’s apparent leniency toward Satterfield shows that what he allegedly did was not unusual in a city where sharing and exchanging information — including confidential information — is a key driving force. The same, some pro-Israel activists said, applies to Rosen.

“The way Steve Rosen was behaving was the way anybody else in the lobbying world, in his situation, would have behaved,” Sher said, adding, “This is what goes on in Washington every day. It’s an information trade, and people pass on sensitive information. It just goes on all the time. It’s commonplace.”






Find us on Facebook!
  • Novelist Sayed Kashua finds it hard to write about the heartbreak of Gaza from the plush confines of Debra Winger's Manhattan pad. Tough to argue with that, whichever side of the conflict you are on.
  • "I’ve never bought illegal drugs, but I imagine a small-time drug deal to feel a bit like buying hummus underground in Brooklyn."
  • We try to show things that get less exposed to the public here. We don’t look to document things that are nice or that people would like. We don’t try to show this place as a beautiful place.”
  • A new Gallup poll shows that only 25% of Americans under 35 support the war in #Gaza. Does this statistic worry you?
  • “You will stomp us into the dirt,” is how her mother responded to Anya Ulinich’s new tragicomic graphic novel. Paul Berger has a more open view of ‘Lena Finkle’s Magic Barrel." What do you think?
  • PHOTOS: Hundreds of protesters marched through lower Manhattan yesterday demanding an end to American support for Israel’s operation in #Gaza.
  • Does #Hamas have to lose for there to be peace? Read the latest analysis by J.J. Goldberg.
  • This is what the rockets over Israel and Gaza look like from space:
  • "Israel should not let captives languish or corpses rot. It should do everything in its power to recover people and bodies. Jewish law places a premium on pidyon shvuyim, “the redemption of captives,” and proper burial. But not when the price will lead to more death and more kidnappings." Do you agree?
  • Slate.com's Allison Benedikt wrote that Taglit-Birthright Israel is partly to blame for the death of American IDF volunteer Max Steinberg. This is why she's wrong:
  • Israeli soldiers want you to buy them socks. And snacks. And backpacks. And underwear. And pizza. So claim dozens of fundraising campaigns launched by American Jewish and Israeli charities since the start of the current wave of crisis and conflict in Israel and Gaza.
  • The sign reads: “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any circumstances.”
  • Is Twitter Israel's new worst enemy?
  • More than 50 former Israeli soldiers have refused to serve in the current ground operation in #Gaza.
  • "My wife and I are both half-Jewish. Both of us very much felt and feel American first and Jewish second. We are currently debating whether we should send our daughter to a Jewish pre-K and kindergarten program or to a public one. Pros? Give her a Jewish community and identity that she could build on throughout her life. Cons? Costs a lot of money; She will enter school with the idea that being Jewish makes her different somehow instead of something that you do after or in addition to regular school. Maybe a Shabbat sing-along would be enough?"
  • 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.