It might be better to hold Pollard in reserve and trade him when the israelis catch an american spy.

Posted by: J Thomas at April 16, 2006 02:53 AM | Permalink to this comment

This is a pretty good idea.

I don't know what your reservations are, Greg, but pretty much every Palestinian leader we've ever seen arise has been universally derided as weak, incompetent, or a dangerous psycho.

So if your first instinct is to label Barghouti as one of these, then it hardly makes a difference either way, unless you think he is actually significantly worse than Hamas, which I'd like to see a case for.

The only reason I'd have concerns is that Barghouti's release as the end point in a covert psyop/economic campaign to overturn Hamas after a few months in office will discredit Barghouti and neuter him. It could also lead to real, honest-to-goodness civil war.

I want the Hamas government to be voted down in elections, not tossed aside in a mob rule. That would be a historic first for a region that has Islam stuck in its throat and is going to need to digest it, without us digging around with screwdrivers.

Internally, Hamas is as moderate an organization as we've seen from Islamic radicals, and I bet Barghouti might prefer to stay in his cell that be carried to power on a U.S. white horse. He's no Ahmed Chalabi.

Posted by: glasnost at April 16, 2006 05:02 AM | Permalink to this comment

No.

Posted by: Zathras at April 16, 2006 05:55 AM | Permalink to this comment

Even worse, what if we do the trade, the israelis release Barghouti to palestine, Barghouti says or does something the israelis don't like, and they pick him up again?

That would be a bad trade.

Posted by: J Thomas at April 16, 2006 02:42 PM | Permalink to this comment

Let me get this straight. Israel wants us to release a spy, and in exchange, they will release a murderer. I understand that Bargouthi is part of the the new generation in Fatah, but is he really such an enormous improvement on Muhammad Dahlan or Rajoub that we need him sprung? Is the idea that he would be competitive enough to head a Fatah list in new elections that could defeat Hamas? If he was, it would be in the Israeli interest to release him anyway. I would absolutely not support such a deal.

I am generally quite supportive of our relationship with Israel, but the continued interest in Jonathan Pollard, year after goddamn year, really irritates me. He was a spy and got punished. The Israelis got caught with their hand in the cookie jar - plain and simple. Why can't they just let it be?

Posted by: Charlie at April 16, 2006 03:39 PM | Permalink to this comment

I don't blame the Israelis for trying. When an American spy is captured, I would hope our government does what it can for him, within reason.

This story makes no sense. Charlie has put his finger on the biggest flaw. If the idea is to undermine Hamas, Israel's interest in doing so is at least as great as America's. I would think it is many times as strong. So why should the U.S. be bribing Israel into this?

It also makes no sense in PR terms. In the middle of the celebrated 'war on terror', the U.S. grants a big concession in return for the release of a terrorist?

I don't know much about the Pollard case. I've never taken the time to research it systematically, so I only know what I've read here and there.

As I understand, it is alleged that the Israelis passed some of Pollard's intel to the Soviets, leading to some American deaths. None of the three linked articles mention this. That's a significant omission, unless the claim is completely bogus.

Posted by: David Tomlin at April 16, 2006 04:55 PM | Permalink to this comment

No. No. No. (1) Pollard deserves no sympathy and, unless there is a clear and great benefit to the US from his release, should rot in prison; (2) There are about five assumptions too many in the argument that Barghouti would be an improvement;* (3) The better course is to respond to the Palestinians' moves rather than try to reset the board -- for instance, by using carrots and sticks (mostly sticks) to try to reform Hamas; and (4) If we do let Pollard go in an exchange, let if be for someone to whom we owe something. We owe nothing to Barghouti, an unrepentent terrorist.

*That Barghouti would assume power; that Barghouti could exercise power; that Barghouti is a moderate; that Hamas cannot be reformed, but must be replaced; that Barghouti can bring an (unreformed) Hamas to the table or (alternatively) has the desire, power and wherewithall to destroy Hamas.

Posted by: von at April 16, 2006 05:43 PM | Permalink to this comment

NO.
Pollard DID what he DID. If we swap for a big quid pro quo over an american agent that's one thing. But for what, documentation on who was involved in Israel? WHo cares now? They had their own national interest, we had ours.
Pollard stays

Barghouti as well.
What possible benefit except to salafists can accrue from releasing him?

Posted by: epaminondas at April 16, 2006 06:22 PM | Permalink to this comment

As someone with a high-level government security clearance who's worked in the Intelligence Community for over a decade, Pollard should rot in Jail. The only reason to ever consider a trade is if the Israeli's caught a bona-fide American spy red-handed in Israel. I doubt that will ever happen for a number of reasons I won't go into here.

It does not matter that he spied for one of our supposed allies. He's a dirtbag traitor, plain and simple, and needs to serve his time like every other spy.

Posted by: Andrew at April 16, 2006 08:48 PM | Permalink to this comment

Pollard is a traitor.

the idea he should get off because the secrets wentto Israel is asinine. Israel gave Pollard's material to the Russians.

If Pollard is ever allowed out it will be an insult to everyone who has ever had a security clearence - and anyone whose life depended on someone else having a clearence.

There was a Greek American guy who got 14 years for a much smaller violation that never went to the Russians. He cooperated and got 14 years. The material Pollard passed to Israel, which then was passed to Moscow was much more harmful -- and neither he nor Israel cooperated.

Posted by: Dave at April 17, 2006 05:31 PM | Permalink to this comment

> If Pollard is ever allowed out it will be an insult to everyone who has ever had a security clearence - and anyone whose life depended on someone else having a clearence.

I'm not sure how pressing a consideration that is with the powers that be, after the scandals of CIA leaks -- I mean, even before the current "leaker-in-chief" scandal about Bush & Cheney blowing foreign agents to try to punish Joe Wilson for saying things they didn't like -- which makes it annoyingly hard to google for the previous notorious leaks by the CIA itself.

The CIA caught its own DCI (Deutch) with classified material on an unclassified laptop at his house hooked up to the Internet in 96.

Posted by: sparpoon at April 17, 2006 06:17 PM | Permalink to this comment

The only possible benefit for releasing Barghouti would be as a public relations gambit with the Europeans, which unfortunately still sees Barghouti as a "moderate" and supposedly somebody the Quartet could negotiate with. He's more likely to continue the policies of Arafat and Abbas aka spout the benefits of diplomacy and moderation towards Israel while doing precious little to rein in or disarm Islamic Jihad or Hamas. If he gained power and allowed Islamic Jihad or Hamas to turn to military options, he'd end up with Europe's sympathy ala Arafat in his final years because Israel would be forced to react militarily and confine him in his compound like they did with Arafat. It's a no-win proposition for the U.S. and has marginal benefit to the state of Israel. I suspect the deal is being pushed by Israeli intelligence, which is just showing loyalty to its agents like we would if they got caught.

Posted by: Chris at April 17, 2006 08:18 PM | Permalink to this comment

The more the readers of this blog concentrate on the meaning of Pollard -- namely, that our alleged best ally in the Middle East in fact spies on us -- the better.

Can someone remind me why we tether ourselves to those people? Or to ask another question: how would readers react if the French were caught spying on us? With wailing expectoration, I expect. So why is it any different with the Israelis?

Posted by: Cynic at April 22, 2006 01:20 PM | Permalink to this comment