Former security chief lashes PM

FORMER Shin Bet chief Yuval Diskin has caused national controversy in Israel by delivering a stinging criticism of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Ehud Barak at a political meeting.

“My major problem is that I have no faith in the current leadership, which must lead us in an event on the scale of war with Iran or a regional war,” Diskin said last Friday. He described the men as “two messianics” and said: “I don’t believe in a leadership that makes decisions based on messianic feelings.”

He claimed: “They are misleading the public on the Iran issue. They tell the public that if Israel acts, Iran won’t have a nuclear bomb. This is misleading.

Actually, many experts say that an Israeli attack would accelerate the Iranian nuclear race … These are not people who I would want to have holding the wheel in such an event.”

Having “observed them up close”, he said that they “are not people who I, on a personal level, trust to lead Israel to an event on that scale and carry it off”.

This is the second time that a recently retired defence chief has spoken out against the government’s direction on Iran. Last summer, former Mossad chief Meir Dagan caused controversy by saying that an a military strike on Iran would be a “stupid thing”. He reiterated this sentiment at a New York conference this week.

Ministers have accused both Diskin and Dagan of acting irresponsibly, and of exploiting their status to launch political careers. But the broigus between ministers and these men is not the real issue here.

Beyond the soundbite criticism of the two men is a genuine fear that they are making public information which they saw, in confidence, in their official capacities.

Critics see it as absurd that employees who leave companies seem to be bound by stricter confidentiality clauses than Diskin and Dagan. The real significance of the Diskin row is not the revelation that he dislikes Netanyahu and Barak and disapproves of an Iran attack. Rather, it’s that it underscores how desperately Israel needs a clear policy on what retired defence chiefs are allowed and not allowed to say in the months after their retirement.

Former intelligence chiefs should be a resource for government officials to consult for years after retirement, not a source of friction as they are increasingly becoming.

Only mutually agreed red lines, which create a balance between free speech and the need for discretion, will allow the state to fix relationships with this important sector.