By Munir K. Nasser
Washington DC
The US State Department reacted strongly to press reports that the suspension of the security clearance for the US Ambassador in Israel Martin Indyk on charges of security violations came as a result of pressure from Congress.
State Department Spokesman Richard Voucher denied in his briefing on Monday that the decision to investigate Indyk came after charges from some Congress members of a cover up. “That’s absolutely false allegation,” he stressed. He also said that this decision has no connection with Indyk’s recent speech in Israel in which he said that the two sides should share Jerusalem.
In response to allegations made by some Jewish American leaders that Indyk has been targeted because of his religion, Boucher said: “ that’s not only absolutely false and absurd, it’s frankly pretty insulting as well.”
Answering a question about Indyk’s role in the peace negotiations during the investigation, Boucher said: “Obviously, the fact that he doesn’t have a security clearance, and therefore is not able to participate in the deliberations, makes things more difficult, because he has been an important member of the team… Nonetheless, we have ways of communicating with the Israeli government, and we can proceed with the peace process without him being able to play an active role.”
Boucher confirmed that this is the first time an ambassador’s security clearance has been suspended. He revealed, however, that the State Department has suspended since January 1 the security clearances of five employees for violations of security policies. He added that there have been another 27 employees in the last two years who have had their security clearances suspended for other reasons. In Indyk’s case, Boucher said the investigators felt that his violations were more serious and warranted an investigation.
Boucher cautioned, however, that there was no need to rush to judgment on Indyk’s future with the State Department. “Ultimately, whether he qualifies for a security clearance in the future, for reinstatement; whether he’s able to take up his position again and to exercise his functions is something that’s not yet decided,” he announced.
ARAB AMERICAN REACTION
Meanwhile, Arab American leaders reacted cautiously to Indyk’s suspension, telling Albawaba.com that they only speak off the record because it is premature to comment on the episode intelligently. Jim Zogby, President of the Arab American Institute, however, said if the story is true on its face value, “it is disturbing and sad. It is unfortunate.”
Zogby stressed that he does not know what the story means. He told Albawaba.com: “It is sad for Martin, and it is troubling generally because of this whole issue of security and how it operates. We have so many cases of this sort in the last couple of years that are disturbing even in the way they are handled. I kept thinking, if Martin were Chinese, he would be in jail right now.”
Commenting on the reports in the Arab press that Indyk has leaked intelligence information about the Arab countries to Israel, Zogby said: “ I don’t think it would be appropriate to speculate. It is unfortunate that we engage in any kind of speculation at this point because we just don’t know what the story is.”
Zogby thinks Indyk has made enemies on both sides of this situation. “Many Arab Ambassadors think he was fair. Many others feel that he has a bias towards Israel. Some accuse him of arrogance; there are rivalries within the State Department. I am not ready to write the evaluation of Martin Indyk’s career other than to say that I have known him, he has done some good things, and all of us will be watching him. When more information becomes clear, we will be able to make an evaluation of what this is all about,” he said.
A former senior Arab diplomat in Washington said it is premature to comment while the investigation is ongoing. “We don’t want to challenge them without the necessary evidence,” he told Albawaba.com. The charges are still allegations,” he stressed. The Arab diplomat thinks the peace process is “entering the ice stage.” He urged the Palestinians to stop and take stock and wait for the new US administration to come and consolidate institutions. The Indyk affair is a peripheral matter in the over all strategy, he said.
An Arab American official, who is quite familiar with the Indyk case, told Albawaba.com that he reads this simply as a person who violated the security code. “It could have happened to anybody and it got him in trouble. Basically he has to bear a personal responsibility for violating the security code internally,” he explained.
The Arab American leader accused President Clinton of taking a risk when he appointed Indyk in his Administration. “This is what we warned about in 1992 when Arab American organizations issued a statement that people of highly partisan background are not entitled to serve in these positions. So when you take somebody of this background, you take that risk. Because no matter how professional that person is, he is apt to slip somewhere,” he argued.
The Arab American official criticized the Arab press for accusing Indyk of espionage when the Clinton Administration is claiming so far that this case does not involve espionage. “We have to be careful with that especially in the Arab press that reported on charges of espionage. So far there is no evidence or charge of espionage, it is just a violation of internal security arrangements regarding the use of computers,” he said.
He cautioned against the charge of “dual loyalty” against Indyk because it can be used against Arab Americans who are sometimes accused of being more loyal to Arab countries than to the US. “This is something we fight against, and I don’t think we should use it when someone is down from the other side to serve our political interest. It is a serious charge, if indeed Indyk has violated the law, and if indeed there are spying charges, let’s wait and see what the investigation will produce before we start making allegations,” he noted.
The Arab American leader said that there was no doubt that Indyk came from a very strong Zionist background. “When he accepted his job, he told me in his own words, ‘I admit my background as a very highly partisan, but I guarantee you I am a professional person, but when I start my job, you are not going to see any partisan performance. I am going to be professional, and I am going to advocate both sides and push the policy the way it is set here in Washington, and not the way it is set in Israel or at AIPAC.’ I think to a great degree he has done that,” he confirmed.
He believes Indyk’s leaving the State Department will have a minimal effect on the peace process. According to him, the American system is a system of institutions, not individuals, so the policy will continue, “whether Clinton is there, or Indyk is there, it is a policy that goes beyond the personality,” he said. He noted that the center of gravity of US Middle East policy has shifted in the last few weeks, and nobody even noticed, when the process was taken over by the White House. “It is Sandy Burger, and not Madeleine Albright, who is running the peace process since the Camp David summit,” he stressed – Albawaba.com
© 2000 Al Bawaba (www.albawaba.com)
