FAS|政府保密|E-Prints|||指数|搜索|Join FAS

FAS Note: Avner Cohen is the author ofIsrael and the Bomb，以色列核计划的历史。如下一封信中所述，他的工作一直是以色列引起了巨大法律和政治争议的主题。截至2001年2月，尚未收到这封信的答复。

Avner Cohen博士
高级研究学者
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland
School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742-1811, U.S.A.

25 July 2000

Mr. Elyakim Rubinstein
总检察长
29 Salah Ed-din街
耶路撒冷，以色列

Dear Sir:

1.这封信旨在阐明我对以色列法律权威的情况。具体而言，这封信介绍了五个中心主题：

2. I am in contact with MK Zehava Gal-On and MK Naomi Chazan, both of whom are members of the Knesset Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense. My understanding is that MK Gal-On has already approached your office in connection with this matter, specifically to State Prosecutor Edna Arbel.

3. On July 5, 2000, I wrote a detailed letter on this subject to MK Dan Meridor, Chairman of the Knesset Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense. In my letter to MK Meridor, I asked not only for his aid in resolving this matter, but also for an independent investigation of the activities of the MALMAB in my case over the past decade.

4.我诚挚的希望是，这封信将以一种安静而有效的方式导致这一问题的结论，这使我们所有人都很困难。

Background

5. Essentially, what is called "the Avner Cohen affair" refers to the ten year conflict (1990-2000) between myself and various elements of the security apparatus, above all the head of the MALMAB, Yehiel Horev. The subject of the conflict was the research, writing and publication of my bookIsrael and the Bomb(New York, Columbia University Press, 1998).

6. Although this conflict involved, regrettably, a significant personal dimension, its central point goes to the very heart of Israeli democracy: the tension between the policy of nuclear "opacity" (amimut) and the foundations of democracy. To put it another way, the conflict is about defining the boundaries of discussion and the freedom of academic research on the subject of Israeli nuclear policy, in such a way that it does not endanger national security, on the one hand, or the open-democratic character of the State, on the other hand.

7. I need hardly add that this central topic, and its application and consequences for nuclear policy, is part of the academic field in which I specialize.

8. On this matter of principle, my views differ profoundly from those of the MALMAB. In my opinion, the MALMAB adheres to an anachronistic position that has been rendered obsolete by the political and social realities of Israel in the year 2000.

9.马尔马布观点的一种表达出现在本周的媒体上（Haaretz，2000年7月23日）。马尔马布办公室在耶路撒冷的地方法院写了一封信，该信正在考虑从vanunu审判中释放文件，并表示反对其出版。马尔马布代表在他的信中写道：“将[核]主题介绍给公共议程的每一次介绍都可能有助于那些寻求破坏以色列国安全政策的人的目的和各种利益。”

10. This letter is eloquent testimony to the MALMAB's complete lack of awareness as to the limits of its authority in a democratic society. Since when is the MALMAB responsible for restricting the speech of those citizens who are interested in placing these and other issues on the public agenda? Who appointed the MALMAB to oversee the public domain in the name of security and to supervise free expression in the State of Israel?

11. I have every reason to believe that this outlook is also behind the MALMAB's activities in my case, as described below, and that the MALMAB is opposed to every mention of the nuclear issue in public, not merely those factual matters that damage the security of the state. From its perspective, any public discussion of the nuclear issue is itself a blow to state security. This point of view was brought to bear in my case, and it is a serious blow to freedom of expression in a very concrete, unreasonable, disproportionate way that exceeds the MALMAB's authority.

12.对马尔马布和我本人之间的冲突的描述，包括使用军事审查员作为防止公众讨论该主题的工具，将太冗长，无法在这封信中提供。但是，出于背景的目的，我正在附上一个年表，其中包括过去十年的中心事件。为了完成图片，我附上了1995年4月20日的最高法院请愿书中包含的几页，这些页面介绍了该请愿书的事实基础。

The Current Situation

13. 1999年11月底，我收到了以色列警察局的正式通知，通过律师Mibi Muzer（我的书的以色列出版商Schoken的法律顾问）律师进行了国际调查，这表明对我的调查涉及我的调查”违反审查制度“已经关闭，并且不会提出起诉。该通知指出，结束案件的原因是“情况并不能证明持续的调查和/或起诉是合理的。”

14. I naively thought that this notice represented the views of all those who were involved in the case, including the State Prosecutor. This was also suggested to me personally by very senior members of the Israeli Police. It seemed logical to me, since it was a reasonable conclusion to the controversy, both in terms of its intrinsic justice, and in terms of averting damage to the good name of the State of Israel.

15. In principle, I viewed the notice as a slight shift in the policy of the Israeli government on this whole matter, and a certain "rehabilitation" for me personally. That is how I described it in the epilogue that I added to the Hebrew edition of my book (pages attached).

16. With this I considered my case closed, and I was certain that I could come and go as a free man, without being arrested or interrogated, since the affair was altogether over.

17. To my astonishment, it turned out that the affair was not over. The latest chapter of this long and winding saga took place at the end of this past June. I was invited to participate in an academic conference that was to be held on 11 June 2000 that was organized by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Bar Ilan in honor of the publication of the Hebrew edition of my book by Schoken Publishers.

18.在登上飞往以色列的航班之前的几个小时，我通过电话与Schoken出版商的法律顾问Mibi Muzer进行了电话交谈，他们建议我很有可能来到以色列，我将被捕。有了沉重的心，我决定在这种情况下不来以色列。

19. Further developments, and various reports in Haaretz and Yediot Ahronot, present a different picture from that of the Notice from the Police. It turns out that Yehiel Horev, the head of the MALMAB, claims that the case against me had been closed by mistake. According to the report in Yediot Ahronot, Mr. Horev was in contact with the office of the State Prosecutor and asked that she consider prosecuting me for "espionage or some other serious security violation."

20. The developments from the beginning of this month [July] were only partially reported to me. MK Naomi Chazan intended to raise my case for discussion in the Knesset Subcommittee on Security Services of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense, but a few minutes before the meeting of that Subcommittee, MK Dan Meridor spoke with MK Chazan and told her that the subject had already been discussed by Mr. Horev in another Subcommittee, and that the position of the security authorities was that if I came to Israel I would be brought in for interrogation. MK Meridor did not speak at length with MK Chazan and they have been unable to speak in further detail since then since MK Meridor left for the Camp David Summit.

21. My present situation is Kafkaesque. On the one hand, officially, the case is closed and I know of no pending indictment against me. On the other hand, I am receiving impressions, hints, leaks and reports that the moment I arrive in Israel I might be arrested immediately and taken to interrogation.

22. This cannot be. A citizen is entitled to know his status with respect to the legal authorities, and to receive official notification concerning it. If the investigation against me was concluded "by mistake," and the Police are to reopen it, then I have a right to know about it and to receive formal notice about it. It is also important to me to know what factual changes, if any, occurred between November 1999 and June 2000 that would require reopening the case.

23. From various press reports, it appears that the decision will be made by the State Prosecutor, that it has not yet been made, and that even when it is made, you will be able to change it. Permit me to elaborate some of the considerations and points that should be taken into account in deciding my case. It is important to me to present them from my point of view.

Banning of the Research and the Petition to the Supreme Court

24.在我的主动,我提交的第一个博士aft of an article on the topic of my research for review by the Censor, Brig. Gen. Shani at the end of 1993. At first, the Censor refused to review the material. But at the end, he agreed to do so. After long months of deferral and delay, he banned publication of the article in its entirety.

25. I appealed this arbitrary and unreasonable decision to the Supreme Court, at which I was represented by Gilead Sher. My petition was directed against the Military Censor and the Minister of Defense.

26. The petition was argued before the Supreme Court in September 1994. The justices did not issue a ruling immediately, but rather urged the parties to arrive at a reasonable compromise, since a ruling on the matter would take a long time.

27. In accordance with the Court's recommendation I undertook, to the best of my ability, many extended efforts to find a practical compromise, including preparation of a new draft that was submitted anew for review by the Censor. This time too the entire article was banned in its entirety by the Censor with the support of the MALMAB.

28. During this extended struggle, it became clear to my attorney and me that it was not the Censor who was stubbornly pursuing the case against me, but the MALMAB. We received reassuring signals from the Censor, but it was the MALMAB who was calling the shots.

29. At the beginning of 1995, after all efforts at compromise had proved fruitless, I despaired of achieving anything in this way, and with my attorney Mr. Sher, I withdrew my petition from the Supreme Court. I explained the reasons for this decision in a personal letter to the judges, which is attached.

30.如前所述，从1995年到1998年，我继续在美国进行研究，然后在那里出版了书。有关更多详细信息，请参阅所附的年表。

The Arbitrariness of the Censor and the MALMAB

31. To my knowledge, this case is the first instance in the history of the State of Israel in which a full-length academic work, written by a researcher without access to official secrets, was prohibited from publication in such a sweeping manner. An academic work is not equivalent to a story in the newspaper, and they should not be treated the same. And the fact that the author does not have access to official secrets and therefore is not violating the constraints that are imposed on employees of the security apparatus who seek to publish their own personal accounts is also an important consideration.

32. I am not aware of any Israeli researcher in my position, who resides permanently in the United States (I have been a U.S. resident since 1990), who submits academic material for review by the Censor. I am unaware of any precedent for this. In contrast, there are numerous Israeli academics active in strategic and historical studies and political science who have published numerous studies, articles and books that relate to Israel's security, including the nuclear realm. To the best of my knowledge, many of them have not even tried to gain the Censor's approval for publication, and following publication, nothing was done to them.

33.据我所知，最后一次（这是几次）有人因违反审查制度而被起诉的是1960年代中期（是报纸报纸的编辑Maxim Gilan），这是记者，而不是学术研究员。

34. Israeli journalists who publish extremely sensitive information from time to time without submitting it to the Censor are punished only in extreme cases and only by a fine imposed on their newspapers. In most instances, the Censor is satisfied with issuance of a letter of warning.

35.我还知道以色列记者的特定案例，为外国报纸工作，他们在没有提前向检查员提交审查员的情况下发布了高度敏感的信息。例如，几周前，一位以色列记者在伦敦的《星期日泰晤士报》上撰写了一篇文章（以他自己的名字），试图从以色列潜艇发射巡航导弹。过去，同一位记者暴露了特别敏感的信息，例如在Vanunu事件中被称为“ Cindy”的Mossad代理的全名和地址。明显损害国家安全的这种极其敏感的信息的发布并不值得审查员或马尔马布的任何行动。他们绝对被忽略了。

Some Specific Considerations Concerning the Research

36. I would emphasize with respect to my book and the underlying research that at no point did I violate any formal agreement to protect state secrets that were provided to me in the course of some employment, nor did I ever obtain information by any illegal means. I obtained all the information and the documents from the official archives of Israel and the United States, and all the documents I used are open to the inspection of anyone under the laws of the countries where they are located. I conducted interviews with various people, and whenever I was warned that a certain detail could not be published, I did not publish it.

37. As an expert in the field, I believe I know the difference between information that is properly classified and that which is not. Based on this knowledge, I removed from my work many sections that I thought could have damaged state security. My published work is far from reflecting the full scope of my knowledge and understanding of the topic.

38.本研究的主题是故意circumscribed as a political history of the Israeli nuclear program up to the year 1970. There is nothing in the book that refers to the 30 years that have passed since then. It is difficult to understand how publication of 30 year old political information could damage state security today.

39. I would stress that I have refrained from introducing technological, organizational, or military details. My work focuses principally on the political realm. I did this so as not to damage, or to disclose details that could damage, state security. Certainly, this has been clear to readers, and it was noted, for example, by journalist Aluf Benn in his review of the book. (Haaretz, 27 June 2000).

40.此外，看来那些完全了解此事及其历史的秘密并仔细阅读本书的人认为，其中没有任何东西会威胁到国家安全。尤瓦尔·尼曼（Yuval Neeman）教授，阿夫拉汉姆·赫蒙尼（Avraham Hermoni），以色列·多斯特罗夫斯基（Avraham Hermoni）教授和其他人都明确地说明了这一点。

Public Considerations

41. No one knows better than you that freedom of research is a basic legal right that is defended by the Israeli democratic system. The Supreme Court has on several occasions treated freedom of research as a right distinct from freedom of expression and the public's right to know, which serve as the basis for freedom of the press. Academic research is elevated far beyond the publication of transient news information, and its contribution to society is far greater. The conduct of the Censor in an arbitrary, unreasonable, disproportionate manner, devoid of political or security logic, seems to reflect an extremely narrow, anachronistic, and undemocratic view held by a number of officials in the Israel nuclear complex that any and all publicity threatens the policy of nuclear "opacity" which Israel has upheld for decades.

42.国防机构中的某些人试图将我描绘成一个极端的思想家，他持有反核观​​点或偏爱核“透明度”。首先，这些主张远非事实，因为看书的任何人都可以说明，其次，这些断言涉及个人意见，而不是事实。

43.大量的公共政策和政治considerations dictate that this whole affair be quietly terminated. The attempt by the MALMAB to persist in his vendetta over publication of the book is likely to cause serious long-term damage to the reputation and good name of Israeli democracy.

44.安全机构成员对我宣布的战争实际上对不透明政策造成了巨大损害。整个努力简单地吸引了以色列和世界各地越来越多的媒体关注，这是马尔马布如此顽固地掩盖这一主题。此外，如果马尔马布如此强烈反对这本书的出版，那么它倾向于确认其内容是绝对正确的，并且基于第一级的来源。整个争端只会使这本书更大，并从另一项学术工作中转变为纪录片，其中一部分是投机性的，是以色列核计划的最权威的来源。

我遭受的个人伤害

45. The final points I would like to make are in a more personal vein. Though I have settled in the United States over the past decade, I have not renounced my close ties to Israel. But in recent years I have been unable to visit my mother Adina, a 74 year old Holocaust survivor, as a result of the campaign against me, nor to visit my only sister who lives in Israel.

46. My work as a researcher has also suffered. I am unable to attend academic conferences in Israel, and I have acquired a reputation as an "untouchable" through the efforts of officials in the security system who have approached conference organizers and persuaded them not to invite "criminals" to their meetings.

47.当然，对我的个人伤害很难承受。与我的朋友，我的家人和家园的分离造成了损失，我真的感觉像是“政治难民”。我有意识地选择了以色列许多人认为“禁忌”的研究主题，尽管我在收集信息和制定信息方面没有犯任何犯罪，但安全机构的成员，尤其是马尔马布试图通过使用来实施我的沉默审查。由于这没有成功，因此他们对我进行了个人仇杀，试图阻止我来到以色列。

48. I am not exaggerating when I say that the MALMAB and other security elements have determined to prevent me from continuing my research on this subject in Israel and thus, while presuming to speak in the name of the Rule of Law, to silence my voice in Israeli public discourse on the nuclear question.

49. Here there is another public interest. Because to silence me is essentially to silence public discussion of this topic by threats of interrogation and arrest, insinuations, leaks and twisted accusations that recall McCarthyism in America of the 1950s rather than an enlightened democracy of the third millennium.

Summary

50. I request from your office a full clarification of my status with respect to the legal authorities of the State of Israel. Is there in fact a pending investigation against me? If I come to Israel will I be summoned to interrogation? Are those hints and leaks to the press accurate?

51. In my humble opinion, the time has come to conclude this affair in the spirit of the decision made by the Police in November 1999. In this way, the conflict could be brought to an end without damage to Israeli democracy or to essential security interests of the State of Israel. In any case, I do not believe that a renewed police investigation would turn up any new factual information.

52.我不知道可能会有什么询问我，但是，如果仍然需要审问我，我会充分准备在最早的机会中与我的完全合作进行讯问。审讯可以由以色列警察的代表或以色列法律当局任命的其他任何人在华盛顿特区进行审讯。

53.另外，只要我的律师与您的办公室之间的安排可以保证我的个人自由，我愿意在以色列受到审问。

54.鉴于我对马尔马布的绝对不信任，基于过去的经验和他过去十年的行为，我要求除了马尔马布以外的其他机构对审讯结果做出判断。这可能包括一个临时专业机构，双方都将同意其成员资格，这将审查审讯结果和马尔马布的行为。我建议这样的身体包括无私的公众人物，例如（Res。）Ami Ayalon，以色列Dostrovsky教授等。

55. I request that your office examine the activities of the MALMAB and its director's handling of my case during the past decade including, in particular, whether he exceeded his authority to such an extent that it constituted a violation of law, and whether his activities are consistent with the norms of democratic government.

56. In any event, I request that my right to be heard by you or by the State Prosecutor be preserved.

57.我想重申这不是纯粹的法律问题。它对以色列民主有重要的影响，尤其是在定义公众讨论的核问题和[其他]敏感政治事项的界限。

58. For sake of these matters, and in the interests of justice and logic, I hope that it will be possible to conclude this affair without further interrogation.

copies:
司法部长Yossi Beilin先生
Edna Arbel, Esq., State Prosecutor
MK Dan Meridor, Chairman, Knesset Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defense
MK Amnon Rubinstein, Chairman, Knesset Committee on Law, Constitution, and Justice
MK Zehava Gal-On
MK Naomi Chazan

Avner Cohen博士
高级研究学者
Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland
School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742-1811, U.S.A.

2000年9月4日
4 Elul 5760

Mr. Elyakim Rubinstein
总检察长
29 Salah Ed-din街
耶路撒冷，以色列

1.这封信为我2000年7月给您的信提供了我的信。我最近了解到，在不久的将来，人们对我的案件进行了预期的讨论，加上我9月份来到以色列的请求，在我的情况下还将在我的案例中包括“更大的”问题。一方面，另一方面是我较早给您的信。

2.令我沮丧的是，情况不允许我直接向您或您的员工提出案件。已经与律师Devora Chen达成了一致，我将在即将进行的讨论之前介绍写作的基本事实，并将其交付给您。

3. As I noted in my prior letter, I do not trust the MALMAB. I fear that due to the lack of a presentation from my side, only partial, tendentious information, brought to you by the MALMAB, will be available to you during your deliberations on my case.

4. As stated, I would like to present here a brief chronology that will clarify the circumstances in which I worked and the activities of the MALMAB that are known to me. This is for two purposes: (a) to show that the fact that I did not submit my book to the Censor was not an act of "taking the law into my own hands" but resulted from the lack of any alternative and the complete lack of cooperation from the Censor, who served as the "mouthpiece" for the MALMAB; and (b) to substantiate my claim that the MALMAB exceeded its authority in the handling of my case.

5. It should be noted that the activities of the MALMAB are not known to me first-hand in their entirety. It will be clear to every reader of the chronology what I learned from personal experience, and what I learned from the press. It should noted further that I have relied solely on journalists known to be particularly reliable with sources in the security system and whose words almost certainly reflect the truth, such as: Ronen Bergman, Emanuel Rozen, Shlomo Nakdimon, Reuven Pedahzur, and others.

6. As one example, I would cite an article that appeared in Haaretz on 4 August 2000, by Ronen Bergman entitled "The Last Attack on Opacity." It was based on sources in the office of the MALMAB and explained that the MALMAB director was fighting me in his capacity as "guardian" of Israel's nuclear opacity. As I have stated, there is nothing in my research whatsoever that would jeopardize state security. But the book itself, from start to finish, is a challenge to opacity, and for that they try to silence me.

7.本文中出现的另一个令人震惊的事实是，那些不愿透露姓名的安全人员对我进行了实时监视，并努力努力发现我所知道的东西以及与我说话的人。这个事实 - 我曾经并且在美国受到监视，并且我的对话正在受到监视 - 任何标准都令人震惊。

8.我想在给您的信中提及其他一些事情。我已经知道，国家检察官办公室正在努力解决是否根据《刑法》中的一项严重安全法规起诉我的法律问题。

9. I wish to say that such an action would have far-reaching consequences for freedom of research, freedom of the press, and Israeli democracy generally. Henceforward, every journalist who reports information that he received from a secret source could expect to be prosecuted for espionage or some other security violation, something that to my knowledge is without precedent in Israel, and that has no counterpart in any enlightened democracy. And of course this kind of approach would nullify the protection of sources enjoyed by journalists and recognized in law and by the Supreme Court. The State of Israel cannot permit itself to prosecute the one who publishes the information but to leave the secret "source", the one who provided the secret information, the real "spy", untouched. Such a decision would open a Pandora's box and would end who knows where. I am not speaking here about my own case at all. Of course, Israel also cannot act in an arbitrary manner, deciding that it will pursue cases in some sensitive areas, but that other sensitive areas that also entail damage to state security, and publications in those areas, may enter the public domain.

10. I would also like to note my continuing astonishment at the intervention of the MALMAB in my case. To the best of my knowledge, it is the GSS (Shabak) and the Police that are responsible for investigating Israeli citizens who are suspected of security violations, not the MALMAB. Certain facts cited in the attached chronology suggest that the MALMAB did all this in order to evade parliamentary criticism of his actions, in the past month.

11. I believe that the material below is of relevance. It is presented with the utmost brevity.

copies:
Edna Arbel, Esq., State Prosecutor
Devora Chen, Esq., Office of the State Prosecutor

年表：Malmab vs。阿夫纳·科恩（Avner Cohen）

一般背景

1981-2

Avner Cohen (AC) received his doctorate from the University of Chicago. Taught Philosophy as a Visiting Assistant Professor at Washington University in Saint Louis. Despite job offers in the U.S., returns to Israel to teach philosophy at Ben Gurion University and subsequently at Tel Aviv University.

1982-6

AC begins his research on philosophical views of the nuclear issue. With his colleague Professor Steven Lee, he edits a volume on the subject of nuclear deterrence and ethics. The two become known in the academic community for their work on this topic. The collection of articles in published in the U.S as Nuclear Weapons and the Future of Humanity (Rowman & Allenheld, 1986). AC works on a Hebrew edition, "Humanity in the Shadow of the Bomb" (HaKibbutz HaMeuhad, 1987).

1986-9

AC spends nearly two years in the U.S. teaching and researching the subject of nuclear proliferation. Upon return to Israel, he delivers a series of lectures on Army radio that are published as "The Nuclear Age as Ethical History." AC presents research proposal to the MacArthur Foundation in the U.S. The research is to focus on the roots of the nuclear taboo in Israel�- the relationship between policy and culture. The proposal is granted.

1990-91

AC在M.I.T.休假。他与马文·米勒（Marvin Miller）博士一起组织了一个关于中东核扩散的项目：危险和前景。伊拉克对科威特的入侵改变了AC对他的工作的概念。他和米勒打算在中东共同写一本关于核扩散和武器控制的书，其中AC将重点关注历史方面和米勒在科学方面。

与安全人员的首次联系

1992

AC到达以色列，开始对以色列核历史的访谈和研究。基本规则是明确的，每个受访者都表示“红线”。尚未发表任何旨在出版的内容。AC收到每个受访者的许可，以发布所发布的所有内容。马尔马布召集他进行初步询问。马尔马布办公室的一个人要求有关该研究的详细信息。AC答案是，该研究将主要在美国与美国同事一起进行，这是一开始。他指出，国家的安全对他很重要，他将考虑在出版前将工作提交给审查员。AC与审查员Brig会面。Shani将军（以下：“ Shani”）。 He informs Shani of his intent to write the work and to submit it to the Censor for clearance. Shani says that despite the sensitivity of the topic he believes it should be possible to arrive at a resolution allowing publication.

1992-3

麻省理工学院项目介绍,在第二年,American-Israeli seminar on nuclear proliferation. Participants include Israeli Mks (Efraim Sneh and Naomi Chazan), retired senior officials (Shalhevet Freier, Gen. (Res.) Tamir), and academics. The existence of the seminar generates considerable suspicion and anxiety in the security system and the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission. The newspaper Maariv publishes an article on February 10, 1993, with the headline "Israeli Nuclear Weapons � Just Talk" At the end of the article there is a reference to an academic who is considered by the security system as a "security threat" of whom it is said that "there are countries where they would do away with someone like that." The reporter confirms to AC that he is the subject of this reference but refuses to disclose who said them. MK Naomi Chazan presents a query in the Knesset regarding what was said. The response of the Minister of Defense and the Prime Minister, presented by Mr. Eitan Haber, is that the Minister regrets these words and does not agree with them. Since the reporter refused to disclose who said them, there is nothing further to be done.

提交材料向审查员提交

October 1993

AC submits to the Censor an article on the political history of the Israeli nuclear project up to 1967. The article deals exclusively with the internal political aspects. There is no technical or military information concerning the nuclear capability in those years. It is based on unclassified information collected in various archives in Israel and the U.S., and on interviews with various people, most of them well-known Israelis, who presumptively would not disclose information that would damage national security. No use of made of classified documents, nor was information ever gathered in an illegal manner. AC has never held a security clearance, and has no other access to information other than that acquired in the course of his research. AC emphasizes that despite the uncertainty of his obligation to submit the article to the Censor, he did so out of a desire not to damage the security of the state, and based on the past assurances of Shani that the purpose would be to clear the article for publication, not to suppress it.

1993年11月

AC arrives in Israel at the beginning of the month for an academic conference. He meets with the Censor and asks him to return the article with modifications, and to discuss with him the details that may be published and those which may not. The meeting is arranged in advance with Shani, based on the understanding that there was a reasonable possibility that the work of the Censor would be completed by this time. During his stay in Israel, an official letter is provided to AC informing him that the Censor has no intention of reviewing the article, except upon completion of the entire book, since the article was presented as part of a more complete book on the topic. Until the writing of the book is completed, AC is forbidden to publish the article. He is also informed that his actions have violated criminal law up to the present day. AC retains the legal services of attorney Gilead Sher (hereafter: "Sher"). Following Sher's intervention, Shani agrees to review the article independently of the book.

February 1994

Up to this point AC faces delay and procrastination on the part of the Censor. In conversations with Sher and others Shani explains that the material was reviewed by security personnel outside of his office, but he again expresses confidence that it will be cleared for publication. Prof. Kenneth Oye, director of MIT's Center for International Studies, writes to the Censor to request clearance of the article and expedited review. The returns the entire article without review. The explanation given is that the article had been distributed to researchers in the field for their review before being cleared. (This is a customary practice in the academic world, similar to pre-publication peer review.) Sher sends an urgent letter to Attorney Nili Arad, the head of the Petition Department [BAGATZ] in the Justice Ministry.

1994年3月

After further discussions, including a special trip to Israel by AC at his own expense to meet with the deputy censor, it is determined that the Censor will reconsider his decision not to review the article and to disqualify it completely.

April 1994

AC将在以色列延长了一个月，以与Shani自己会面。这次会议被Shani推迟了，当莎尼最终举行时，Shani将一封信给AC和Sher，他重申了他的决定，完全不审查该文章并完全禁止其出版。SAR再次试图说服Shani进行进一步的讨论。询问还与副国防部长Mordechai（MOTA）GUR一起进行，后者承诺对此进行调查，但对AC和SAR没有进一步的回应。SAR和律师阿米尔·基德里（Amir Kidri）代表AC的最高法院请愿。哈辛法官发出有条件的命令，指示金博宝正规网址审查员在40天内拒绝他的拒绝。

August 1994

After repeated requests and delays lasting 117 days from the decision of Justice Hashin, the government's response is presented. At the initiative of the Attorney Nili Arad, the head of the Petitions Department at the Justice Ministry, negotiations are renewed on withdrawing the petition in exchange for the Censor's review of the article. But the security demands from the Office of the MALMAB make the research impossible from AC's point of view. These demands include a prohibition against speaking about his research with colleagues, and against sharing with them any material concerning it. The demands of the MALMAB prevent the possibility of any compromise at this stage.

September 1994

The Supreme Court meets behind closed doors on the petition. AC is granted permission to speak, but most of the government's arguments are heard while AC and his attorneys are outside the courtroom. AC arrives with a newly edited version of the article, in a form different from the original and with fewer sensitive points, to his understanding. He responds to a proposal from the bench and acknowledges his readiness to immediately submit an entirely new version of the article. AC also presents to the Censor galleys of an article on the subject that has been accepted for publication by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The Censor again promises to review the material promptly.

October 1994

The Censor again completely bans the material that AC submitted to him, based on the same justifications as previously.

December 1994

经过审查员的最新决定，AC和Sher之间的磋商后，AC决定撤回他的请愿书。他在一封个人信中向法官解释说，缺乏资源，由于听证会的关闭而缺乏公众关注，以及以目前形式的文章变得过时的事实[由于新的档案发现]撤回请愿书。该通知于1995年1月10日发表。与此同时，AC越来越清楚地表明，马尔马布反对他的背后，马尔马布将竭尽所能防止发表文章。AC决定不使用他写的文章，并继续在美国继续研究

请愿书：

February 1995

AC arrives in Israel. He is detained at Ben Gurion Airport by senior Israeli Police oficer, the Deputy Commander of the International Investigative Unit, Nitzav Mishne Shimon Sharvit for purposes of an inquiry concerning his research and censorship. AC again clarifies that the article that was banned will not be published. He refuses to detail his future research plans, and confirms that he intends to continue his research in the U.S. AC becomes aware that he is under surveillance, and that his telephone conversations are being monitored.

August 1995

AC再次被拘留在本古里安机场，随后被西蒙·谢尔维特（Shimon Sharvit）召集给以色列警察讯问。询问他是否将其最终形式的研究提交给审查员。AC拒绝承诺这样做。

1995- 1997年

交流信号合同wi出版他的书th Columbia University Press in New York. The research continues, and a draft is prepared for publication.

Spring 1998

Brigadier General [Tat Nitzav] Hazi Leder, representative of the Israeli Police in Washington, contacts AC. At a meeting of the two, Leder conveys a message from the MALMAB that if the book is published without clearance by the Censor, criminal proceedings may be instituted against AC. AC explains that at this point that is not possible. He further explains that since the Censor refused to review the article, there is no reason to expect that he will review the book. Also, AC writes a letter explaining that there is nothing in the book that would damage state security.

September 1998

The book "Israel and the Bomb" (in English) is published in the U.S. The newspaper Haaretz publishes an editorial about the struggle of the MALMAB against publication from the beginning of the research. The editorial criticizes activities of the MALMAB as unjustified and undemocratic.

1999

Schoken出版社购买了希伯来书的出版物。1999年11月，以色列警方宣布，违反针对AC的审查制度的调查已关闭。结束案件的原因是简单地解释的：“事件的情况不能证明进一步的调查和/或起诉是合理的。”AC认为这件事已经结束。

June 2000

在5月2日退休媒体采访000, Shani describes AC as "an apparent criminal" who "if he enters the country, the legal authorities will need to deal with him." AC is invited to an academic conference at Bar Ilan University to celebrate publication of his book. Telephone calls from the office of the MLMB to the organizers and participants of the conference try to prevent them from inviting AC, presenting him as a "criminal." AC himself is informed a few hours before boarding a plane to Israel that if he comes there is a likelihood that he will be arrested and he will not be permitted to leave the country freely. AC cancels his trip. Ronen Bergman writes in Haaretz on 13 June 2000 ("The Censor Doesn't Grow Up") about the efforts of the MALMAB to prevent the conference at Bar Ilan University celebrating publication of the Hebrew edition of AC's book. He reports that if AC comes to Israel, he may be accused of serious charges of espionage (as opposed to the violations of censorship on which he had been told he would not be prosecuted). He reports, as does Shlomo Nakdimon in Yediot Ahronot on 14 June 2000, that the head of the MALMAB, Yehiel Horev, is pressuring the State Prosecutor, Attorney Edna Arbel, to indict AC on serious security charges, and that he had prepared "a persuasive case" against AC that he had provided to Attorney Arbel. The conference at Bar Ilan University takes place despite the pressure from the MALMAB, but without AC present.

July 2000

AC直接转向MK Naomi Chazan和Zehava Gal-gal-Dan Meridor，因为Malmab的活动处于其管辖范围之下。他要求MK委员会调查此事。MK Chazan要求在其成员的安全服务小组委员会中解决。但是，由于奇怪而可疑的情况，这并没有发生。小组委员会会议举行的瞬间，MK Meridor告诉MK Chazan，另一个小组委员会已经解决了此事（没有指示哪一个），并且Malmab“更新”了此事的成员。因此，很明显，马尔马布（Malmab）在没有充分了解此事的MK面前展示了他的事件版本，并且没有一个人熟悉AC的版本，也没有使Malmab的版本与Malmab的版本相矛盾。这样，马尔马布避免坐在MK Chazan对面的一次会议上，他活跃于此事并熟悉其细节。因此，很明显，马尔马布（Malmab）不相信或更喜欢预防议会对他的活动和表现的批评。AC向州检察官以及其他各种议会和政治人物发送信件。

August 2000

交流的法定代表人转向散文cutor with a request that AC be permitted to come to Israel for a school reunion without being detained upon departure. A response is delayed, and a day prior to AC's planned arrival in Israel, the reply is received that it is impossible to guarantee that AC will not be arrested, and that it appears there are grounds to interrogate him concerning his actions. AC's representative asks the crimes AC is suspected of be specified, but the Office of the State Prosecutor declines to specify them prior to AC's interrogation.

October - December 2000

AC's legal representative seeks several times to arrange a meeting with the State Prosecutor, but his requests are not answered. Following the intervention of MK Zehava Gal-On, AC's representative receives a response indicating that his prior inquiries had not been received, and a meeting is set as he requested. At the present time, AC's letters to Attorney General Elyakim Rubinstein concerning the activities of the MALMAB have not been answered, except to note that his charges are being reviewed.

Translation and HTML:Steven Aftergood


FAS|政府保密|E-Prints|||指数|搜索|Join FAS