Israeli media has recently been awash with reports of a soldier who leaked classified material, but unusually, the public outcry surrounding the case has largely been defending the soldier. There have been protests, sweeping critiques of the enforcement against him, and MKs trying to rush legislation to legalize his actions. What happened?
Background
The affair began in November when the German publication Bild published materials that had been forbidden for publication in Israeli media by Israel's military censorship. The documents claimed, among other things, that Hamas was uninterested in a prisoner exchange deal, supporting Prime Minister Netanyahu's refusal to compromise on control of the Philadelphi Corridor to achieve such an arrangement. The Shsbwk had withheld the materials from the Prime Minister and an NCO gave them to someone in the Prime Minister's office.
The IDF later claimed that portions of the document had been misrepresented, both in the German publication and in a retracted article on the subject by Yediot Aharonot. According to the IDF claims, the document had been written by a mid-level Hamas official, not by Yahya Sinwar, as was said. Additionally, the IDF said it showed Hamas to be specifically interested in a deal rather than specifically opposed to one.
Israel Police and ISA forces began investigating the affair when it became clear that the article actually contained classified information and was not entirely fabricated. Several individuals from the Prime Minister's Office were arrested on suspicions of being the source, among them Eli Feldstein, who served as a spokesman for military affairs.
Feldstein has since been charged with providing confidential information, obstruction of justice, and theft by an authorized person. He was released to house arrest under continual monitoring. Another suspect remains in custody until the end of legal proceedings against him.
Security Implications
The court presiding over the case has declared that the leak contravenes several security directives, foremost of which is the disclosure of classified information to foreign media. Other sources involved in the case have claimed that it could have endangered both the remaining hostages by making it seem like Israel did not want them back and the IDF forces in Gaza by causing Hamas to fight harder.
The sources later stated that disclosing the documents could expose the unique methods and sources by which it had reached Israel, threatening those sources and reducing their capacity to provide further material.
Public Response
Prime Minister Netanyahu has denounced the charges against Feldstein which seem to justify withholding information from the Prime Minister himself. He has been joined by numerous right-wing figures, including Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli, and a letter from over 200 Rabbis protesting the conditions of the detention. Netanyahu has nevertheless denied knowledge of the leak.
Opposition parties have accused Netanyahu of complicity in the leak, with opposition leader Yair Lapid declaring it a national crime and National Unity leader Benny Gantz accusing Netanyahu of ordering the leaks to gain support for his position on the hostage deal.
The family of the other detainee, an NCO who has not been named, has requested that President Herzog pardon him, even if he is convicted.
The Feldstein Law
Coalition MKs have begun legislation on a bill that would legitimize any means of passing critical information to the Prime Minister, or another minister responsible for the information. Although named for Eli Feldstein, the law has been declared to be for the good of the second suspect detained. Allegedly, while enlisted as an IDF soldier, he photographed the classified documents and sent them to Feldstein, who was not authorized to see them.
MK Hanoch Milwidsky (Likud) who helped propose the bill, denounced the IDF's position, saying that information is nevertheless not reaching the leadership in general and the Prime Minister in particular. He noted that the law would allow the Prime Minister to see information that the security system might otherwise have deemed unimportant - as had indeed happened in the documents case. Those proposing the bill reminded the public of how information was kept from the government on October 6th and how observers' warnings were not taken seriously by the IDF.
MK Amit Halevi (Likud), who likewise helped propose the bill, called to investigate the individuals and system that had prevented the Prime Minister from being given the document through ordinary channels.
Ynet reports that several bodies have warned that the law creates further dangers to national security, including opposition MKs, the INSS, and IDF spokesman Daniel Hagari. Hagari was later rebuked for commenting publicly on the matter. An IDF representative at the legislative deliberations stated that "The Prime Minister's intelligence aides are directly exposed to the material through the IDF's intelligence systems. Beyond that, the political leadership can receive any briefing it wants and requests. There is no intelligence information that is not accessible to the political leadership." Opposition MKs objected to the law on the grounds of danger to sources, difficulty in properly securing the information to be transmitted, and that the legislation was too personalized for a single case to be acceptable as a law.