Envoy Exit Leaves Fumbling In Dark
Sydney Morning Herald
Wednesday February 9, 2005
Each time the Australian and Israeli governments refuse to shed light on the dismissal from these shores of the Israeli diplomat Amir Lati, the question list lengthens. Was he a spy? Did he breach Australian security? Was he a participant in passport fraud? Did he recruit Australians to furnish Israel with confidential information? If so, which individuals and which agencies were compromised? Or was Mr Lati ordered to leave because of mysterious "personal aspects of his employment in Canberra", as reports from Israel suggest?
First, we do not know because those who do insist on silence. Second, silence fans suspicion and speculation. Embarrassing as the cause of Mr Lati's departure might be, it could still be a lot more straightforward than the offerings of a fertile rumour mill. Yet governments stand by convention and seek to draw the shutters on the Lati affair, demonstrably willing to run the risk of their citizens imagining the worst. Just how bilateral relations are protected or restored by this method is not so easy to see.So what do we know? Mr Lati was responsible for consular affairs and visas in Australia and New Zealand until Australia demanded his removal several weeks ago. His position could explain a visit to New Zealand last year to meet two detained alleged Mossad agents, Eli Cara and Uriel Kelman, arrested for trying to fraudulently obtain passports, apparently for use in international covert assignments. Israeli Foreign Ministry sources, however, reportedly insist Mr Lati never met the duo, whose convictions soured New Zealand relations with Israel, particularly after Israel failed to apologise for their activities. Then again, Israeli officials reportedly denied being told Australia's reason for demanding the Lati departure, so their reported comments should be treated cautiously. One point is clear, however. The Lati removal would not be done lightly, particularly since Australia's strengthened relationship with Israel and increased reliance on Mossad in keeping tabs on Islamic extremism. Shortcomings of personal behaviour are at the unlikely end of explanation. Australian authorities would be red-faced, however, if a foreign agent revealed gaping holes in our counter-intelligence capability, weakened as it is by concentration on anti-terrorism preparations and surveillance. Australians do not expect fully detailed accounts that put national security at risk. But explanations can be fashioned to serve national interest and to ease anxieties about the people being treated as mushrooms. Openness strengthens public confidence.
© 2005 Sydney Morning Herald