|
Assassinations Plc
Assassinations, or as
they are termed in Israel, "targeted killings," are nothing new to the
Israeli intelligence community. But over the years, at least until the
1970s, they were considered a last resort, a means to be employed
rarely and wisely.
There were a few reasons for this caution. First, many in the
intelligence community thought over the years that espionage was not
mafia-style Murder, Inc. More important, the policy of targeted
killings is a double-edged sword. What you do to your opponents, they
can do to you.
The first time Israeli intelligence carried out an assassination was
on July 11, 1956. Colonel Mustafa Hafez, Egyptian commander of
military intelligence in the Gaza Strip and the man responsible for
sending the fedayeen infiltrators to Israel, was killed when a book he
received exploded.
The use of mail bombs became a central tool in the 1960s, especially
in harassing and assassinating German (former Nazi) scientists who
were involved in developing advanced weapons for Egypt.
After the Six-Day War, the fight against Palestinian terror, both in
the territories and beyond the borders of Israel, moved assassinations
up the ladder of Israeli intelligence priorities. But the watershed
was the murder of 11 Israeli athletes in Munich in 1972 by "Black
September," a Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) front. Then
Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered Mossad head Zvi Zamir to embark upon
a campaign of targeted killings of anyone directly or indirectly
connected with the athletes' murder.
It was the first time in the history of Israeli intelligence that it
had been directed to initiate a "project"--not a one-time killing but
a systematic elimination of dozens of people.
A pattern was set in motion at that time that became the basis for
similar operations to this day. Intelligence compiled a list of
targets; today it is known as a "bank". A special, limited forum known
as the "X Committee" had the authority to approve Mossad requests to
eliminate a person on the list. The X Committee would consult the
attorney general, who served as a one-man court, sentencing the
suspect to death.
This was also the first time that the motive for the assassination was
revenge. Although it was couched in lofty terms like "deterrence" and
"future prevention" of terror, it was clear that the urge to avenge
the deaths of the Israeli athletes was the main reason for the
decision.
The systematic assassination campaign suffered a near fatal blow in
July 1973 in Lillehammer, Norway, when Mossad gunmen, out to eliminate
Ali Hassan Salameh, who was believed to be the brains of Black
September, mistakenly shot and killed a Moroccan waiter, Ahmed
Boushiki.
The failure in Norway brought several questions into sharp relief: Are
targeted killings worthwhile? If so, who should the targets be?
Although clear answers have never been formulated, a kind of tacit
understanding was reached whereby targeted killings are permissible,
in certain circumstances, but the use of this weapon must be cautious,
wise and rare.
It was advisable that only senior operational commanders should be
targeted, those whose deaths would result in a serious impairment of
the organizations' operational capabilities. Responsibility should not
be taken publicly so that Israel would not appear to be using terror
itself, and so that its relations with other countries were not
damaged, as they were with Norway and with Jordan after the attempt to
assassinate Hammas leader Khaled Mashaal in 1997.
The intelligence community also assumes that it is possible, even
desirable, to hit leaders of small organizations, those that are no
more than a "one-man show." Fathi Shikaki, leader of the Islamic
Jihad, was killed in October 1995 on the assumption that killing him
would put an end to the capabilities of his small organization. His
presumed successor, Abdullah Ramadan Shalah, was considered
ineffectual and lacking in leadership capabilities.
Those assumptions were proved wrong. Shalah proved to be a capable
leader, and Islamic Jihad in Gaza has produced some of the worst
suicide bombings of recent years. The most important element that is
always taken into consideration in discussions between the
intelligence chiefs and the political echelon is the cost-benefit
ratio. If the assassination leads to a severe response on the part of
the terror organizations, then it was a losing proposition.
This consideration was apparently either forgotten when it came to the
targeted killing of the director-general of Hezbollah, Abbas Moussawi,
in southern Lebanon in 1992, or those who made the decision operated
on the basis of mistaken assumptions. Hezbollah's response was
stinging: two car bombs in Buenos Aires, against the buildings housing
the Israel Embassy and the Jewish community organization, in which
more than 100 people were killed and many were injured.
With hindsight, there is no doubt that many in the intelligence
community believe that the 1988 decision to hit Khalil al-Wazir,
Yasser Arafat's deputy, also known as Abu Jihad, was a mistake.
Looking back, it is clear to many that his death left Arafat alone at
the leadership level of the PLO, without the counsel of a talented and
pragmatic strategist.
Always, even at the height of assassination wars, there was a kind of
silent agreement on both sides not to hit "national" leaders. Here and
there, exceptions cropped up, like the failed attempt of the Popular
Front for the Liberation of Palestine to kill then former Prime
Minister David Ben-Gurion during a visit to Scandinavia in the 1960s,
or plans devised already in the late 1960s and again in Lebanon in
1982 to kill Arafat.
Already in 1998, after the failed attempt against Meshal, the
subcommittee for intelligence and security services of the Knesset
which investigated the case published an unprecedented critical
statement in which it said, "for many years the governments of Israel
have not formulated policies in the war against terror organizations
that are based on fundamental thought processes and continuity...".
But over the last three years, and especially with the unwise decision
to kill Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, all the basic assumptions and past
lessons have been forgotten or abandoned. From a weapon of last
resort, assassination has become the most available of weapons; from
wise and cautious use, it is now widespread and wholesale.
This change has damaged another, mainly psychological, assumption: the
mystery that surrounded previous assassinations cast fear into the
hearts of the enemy by their very rarity and sophistication. That
mystery dissipates the moment the act becomes routine. This, more than
anything else, shows the long road the Israel Defense Forces and the
intelligence and security forces have traveled, from daring and
creativity to paralyzed thinking. There is also another victim of the
assassination Plc. Israel’s economy is in great danger.
Solomonkebede@yahoo.com
.
|