The caution apparent from our security services when dealing
with holders of Israeli passports who visit this country is
understandable. New Zealanders have not forgotten, nor
forgiven, the attempt in 2004 by presumed Israeli agents to
obtain by deception or identity theft New Zealand passports.
As subsequent events have demonstrated, the Israel security
agencies are known to use false passports in pursuit of
targets, including in assassinations. It is also known New
Zealand passports are highly valued for their integrity.
The 2004 action, in the name of a supposedly friendly nation,
was nothing less than an attack on that integrity by a nation
hypersensitive to criticism of its behaviour.
The Security Intelligence Service and the police, and no
doubt other secret entities, were therefore entitled to be
suspicious of the sequence of events associated with a group
of Israeli citizens caught in the February Christchurch
earthquake.
The four visitors were using a van, and were apparently
tourists backpacking around the country.
One was killed and the other three left the country within 12
hours, assisted by their government and the Israel embassy.
There were other young Israelis in Christchurch at the time,
and at least one was initially thought to have been killed
but was later said to have left the country.
The speed with which the surviving group left the country
aroused the interest of the security agency and an
investigation, which is continuing, began.
Prime Minister John Key has said he spoke to Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu only once at the time of the
earthquake and there was no request by him to facilitate the
removal of the Israelis.
Yet the arrival of an 11-member privately-funded search and
rescue team from Israel soon afterwards further aroused
concerns, and it was denied access to the red zone by the
Government on grounds it lacked proper credentials and was
not United Nations-accredited.
According to one report, since discounted, it was feared the
tourists had attempted to gain access to the police national
computer database. Mr Key subsequently declared the
investigation had not found any link between the group and
Israeli intelligence services.
That assurance must be taken at face value. The important
point is an investigation was thought to be needed. More
pertinent, too, is the apparent fact the news of the
investigation - a matter usually kept closely secret - was
leaked to a newspaper editor, presumably with the intention
it be made public.
That being so, the purpose can surely only have been to send
an informal message to the Government of Israel that, however
normal official relations might now be between it and the New
Zealand Government after the 2004 incident, our security
services continue to keep a close watch on visiting Israelis
and their activities, especially when those activities appear
even superficially to be suspicious.
As in all such incidents, there remain unanswered questions.
It has not been disclosed what specific reasons there were to
arouse suspicion about the group. One claim, that the dead
Israeli had five passports in his possession, has been
denied.
More curiously, there has been no reason given why the
security authorities thought the police computer system might
have been breached. Mr Key's initial responses to questions
appeared less than adequate, indeed misleading, perhaps
because he was at the time visiting the United States.
However, he must have been thoroughly briefed about the
affair - he holds the warrant of Minister in charge of the
SIS - yet was sufficiently vague to leave an impression that
a security breach may have taken place.
Not until some time later did Mr Key produce a form of words
to support his contention nothing amiss had been discovered.
Even this was not categorical, clearly implying the
investigation is continuing, so doubt remains in the minds of
some.
That, of course, does not satisfy the Israel Government or
its unofficial spokesmen, whose reaction has been a mixture
of anger at such allegations and accusations the claims are
"science fiction".
One recently-published interpretation in Israel suggested
domestic New Zealand politics were behind the allegations,
with unnamed officials contending Mr Key's opponents were
trying to portray him as "lenient" on Israel in the lead-up
to the general election - as unlikely a story, perhaps, as
the original cause for suspicion.
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.