The Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency has escalated its counterintelligence assessment of Israel to the highest threat level, marking a significant shift in how U.S. military leadership views surveillance activities by one of America's closest Middle East allies, according to three U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the matter.
The DIA issued an internal alert in recent weeks designating Israel as a "critical" counterintelligence concern, a classification that reflects Pentagon worry that Israeli intelligence services are intensifying efforts to surveil top American officials and extract information about the Trump administration's internal deliberations on Middle East conflicts. The formal assessment runs seven pages and includes a chart detailing Israel's human espionage and technical collection capabilities, rated at the critical level.
The timing coincides with escalating friction between the Trump administration and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over strategy in the Iranian theater. The two leaders clashed this past week in a tense phone call, during which Trump reportedly told Netanyahu he was "crazy," according to reporting. The disagreement centers on whether to pursue diplomatic negotiations with Iran, which Trump is actively pursuing following a ceasefire in early April, versus Netanyahu's push to resume bombing raids against Iranian targets.
Sources emphasized that while espionage among allies is standard practice globally, Israel's recent activity has moved beyond typical intelligence gathering. Pentagon officials did not identify a specific incident that triggered the upgrade, but the heightened alert reflects broader concerns about Israeli intentions as the two countries' objectives in the region diverge.
An Israeli embassy spokesperson rejected the claims outright, stating that Israel does not spy on American entities or government officials. "Israel intelligence collection efforts are aimed at its enemies, not its allies," the statement read. "Any claims to the contrary are either misinformed or politically motivated." The Pentagon declined to comment, and a White House official dismissed the report entirely, calling it false.
Israel's reputation for aggressive intelligence work against the U.S. stretches back decades. The most famous case involved Jonathan Pollard, a Navy intelligence analyst who spent 30 years in prison after selling classified documents to Israel during the 1980s. Emily Harding, a national security expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, characterized Israel as possessing "a hyper-aggressive intelligence service" intensely focused on American operations and decision-making.
The practical impact remains limited for now. U.S. officials already exercise heightened caution when traveling to Israel, using burner phones and computers, and avoiding sensitive conversations in hotel rooms. High-level intelligence sharing between the two countries on Iranian matters continues uninterrupted, according to officials. The DIA assessment does not appear to have triggered any immediate restrictions on the deep operational partnership the two nations maintain.
Historical precedent shows the U.S. conducts its own extensive intelligence collection on allies. Edward Snowden's 2013 revelations exposed American surveillance of European leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel's phone calls, triggering diplomatic backlash across the Atlantic. That episode underscored how espionage, even among partners, can generate lasting friction.
The current situation carries particular risk. Two additional former U.S. officials warned that counterintelligence concerns at a moment of strategic disagreement between Washington and Tel Aviv could undermine the trust that has anchored the bilateral relationship for decades. Israel's intense focus on understanding whether Trump will authorize resumed major operations against Iran reflects the intensity of the intelligence effort and the stakes both countries perceive in upcoming American decisions.
Author Sarah Mitchell: "This alert shows the gloves are off between allies when national interest clashes with trust, and in the Middle East right now, both are at odds."
Comments