Ex-Shin Bet Official Criticizes Handling of Election Interference Suspicions

A former senior Shin Bet official, Moshe Pozailov, has sharply criticized the intelligence service's handling of suspicions regarding election interference, stating that the agency missed a crucial opportunity to gather evidence. Pozailov, now a senior fellow at the Misgav National Security Institute, argued that the professional echelon within the Shin Bet failed to act proactively to build an evidentiary foundation for an investigation. He believes that if security forces had prepared in advance, real-time evidence could have been collected, providing decision-makers with a more solid picture.

Pozailov asserted that the failure began even earlier, with a lack of foresight in identifying and addressing a "deep and broad infrastructure" operating over large areas. He emphasized the need for evidence collection, suggesting the police should have been involved. Attempting to launch an investigation against a Knesset member after the fact, without sufficient prior evidence, could be fruitless and exacerbate public tension, he warned, as the individual might invoke the right to remain silent.

To illustrate the complexities of investigating public figures, Pozailov recalled an incident from his Shin Bet tenure (around 2010-2012) involving suspicions of espionage for Hezbollah by Amir Mahul, described as a well-known journalist with UN observer status. Intelligence gathered through special means, which could not be presented in court without compromising service capabilities, indicated Mahul had provided Hezbollah with locations of targets in Israel, including the Shin Bet's northern headquarters during the Second Lebanon War. Pozailov noted that Mahul's case required extensive legal and command approvals due to his status and the nature of the intelligence gathering.

Pozailov stressed that while the current election interference suspicions are not identical to the Mahul case, they share similar legal and organizational hurdles. He explained that investigating public officials, including Knesset members, requires additional layers of approval, potentially including the Attorney General. Regarding the current election suspicions, Pozailov stated his assessment is based on his impressions, suggesting that intelligence evidence likely exists but its weight and the potential public fallout, particularly concerning relations between Jews and Arabs, are influencing the decision to investigate.

He suggested that the Attorney General is carefully weighing the evidence and the justification for an investigation, considering the political significance of the Arab factions involved and the potential for a broad public reaction. Pozailov believes that if intelligence evidence exists, it may not be substantial enough to warrant the necessary legal approval for an investigation. Without the Attorney General's go-ahead, neither the Shin Bet nor the police can proceed, requiring a joint effort and legal authorization. Pozailov reiterated that the primary failure lies in the intelligence community's inability to identify and prepare for evidence collection before the election, rather than in the legal decision-making process itself.