By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Growing ties between the U.S. and Russia are prompting concern among key American allies, including members of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance and nations like Israel and Saudi Arabia. These allies fear that increased cooperation with Russia could inadvertently expose the identities of their intelligence sources. Consequently, discussions are underway regarding potential adjustments to intelligence-sharing protocols to mitigate this risk. This broader reassessment of U.S. relationships encompasses diplomatic, trade, military, and intelligence collaborations.
Read the original article here
Israel’s apprehension regarding intelligence sharing with the U.S. stems directly from a perceived threat posed by the close relationship between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. This fear isn’t unfounded; precedents exist from Trump’s first term, including the alleged leak of a Mossad agent’s identity to Russia, forcing Israel to undertake a risky extraction to save the agent’s life. This incident underscores the very real danger of compromised intelligence.
The potential for such leaks isn’t merely hypothetical; it’s a palpable risk given Trump’s history and documented behavior. His willingness to disregard established norms and alliances, coupled with a demonstrably transactional approach to foreign policy, suggests a disregard for the security of U.S. allies. This concern is especially pertinent in the context of a broader geopolitical struggle, where the enemies of Israel also happen to be aligned with Russia, creating a precarious situation for sensitive information exchange.
Adding to the unease is the perception of Trump as unpredictable and prone to impulsive decisions driven by personal gain or petty grievances. The possibility that he might intentionally or unintentionally divulge sensitive information to Russia, whether for personal reasons or as a political maneuver, is a serious consideration for Israel. This concern transcends partisan politics; it’s a matter of national security.
Furthermore, the inherent distrust in Trump extends beyond the political realm. Accusations of his being a “Russian asset,” or at least excessively susceptible to Russian influence, fuel the skepticism. This perception casts doubt on the integrity of any information shared with the U.S., raising concerns about the ultimate destination and utilization of sensitive intelligence.
The situation is compounded by the fact that Israel is already cautious about sharing intelligence even under the best circumstances, typically exercising extreme selectivity. Given Trump’s track record and perceived pro-Russian stance, this natural wariness has undoubtedly intensified, leading to a reevaluation of the risks involved in continued cooperation.
These fears aren’t just theoretical musings; many believe that informal restrictions on intelligence sharing are already in place. The Israeli government, renowned for its intelligence capabilities and well-informed decision-making, wouldn’t voice such concerns lightly. Their hesitance speaks volumes about their assessment of the situation and the perceived threat posed by the Trump-Putin relationship.
The impact of this strained relationship extends far beyond the bilateral concerns of the U.S. and Israel. The broader implications for global intelligence sharing are significant. If even a close ally like Israel is reluctant to share information with the U.S., it raises concerns about the reliability and trustworthiness of the American intelligence community. This could lead other nations to reconsider their intelligence-sharing arrangements with the U.S., potentially harming U.S. national security and its standing on the world stage.
In short, Israel’s hesitation to share intelligence with the U.S. during a Trump presidency is not a matter of petty politics, but a reasoned response to a perceived real and substantial threat. The risk of sensitive information falling into the wrong hands is simply too high to ignore. The potential consequences for Israel’s security, and for the broader geopolitical landscape, are simply too great to dismiss lightly. The situation underscores the serious implications of compromising national security through potentially compromised alliances.