Full text: In letter to cabinet, Bar says his firing ‘entirely tainted by conflicts of interest’

The following is the full text of Shin Bet Director Ronen Bar’s letter to the cabinet, sent as ministers convened to vote on his ouster on March 20, 2025.

Last night, it was reported that the government is set to convene today to discuss terminating my tenure as Director of the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet). This meeting was convened in a rush, contrary to any basic legal principle regarding the right to a hearing and against the position of the attorney general.

As someone who has served the security of the state for over 35 years and holds great respect for its institutions and the rule of law, I wish to clarify, from the outset, that my decision not to attend the government meeting stems solely from my understanding that this discussion does not comply with the legal provisions and rules concerning the termination of any employee’s tenure, let alone a senior official, and especially the Director of the Shin Bet.

I believe that a precedent-setting and significant decision regarding my dismissal from my role as director, particularly after I had already announced that I do not intend to serve out my term, must be based on detailed and substantiated claims, including examples presented to me so that I may respond, with relevant documents if necessary, and only after being given adequate time to do so.

Unfortunately, the draft resolution as formulated contains general, laconic, and unfounded claims that do not allow me to form an orderly response and seem to conceal the motives behind the intention to end my tenure. I would note that even in a preliminary conversation with the Prime Minister, despite my request, no examples were provided.

Under these circumstances, I cannot address the claims made in the draft resolution, which appear to have been brought forth solely for this process and most of which were never mentioned in my conversations with the Prime Minister.

It is no coincidence that not a single example accompanies these claims. A substantive response to such allegations requires proper procedure, including presenting relevant documents, rather than a superficial process with a predetermined outcome. In any case, these are baseless claims, serving only as a cover for entirely different, improper motives aimed at disrupting the ability of the Israel Security Agency to fulfill its role with impartiality, according to the law, and for the benefit of Israeli citizens, not personal interests. Moreover, they seek to prevent the pursuit of truth regarding both the events leading up to the [October 7] massacre and the serious affairs currently under investigation by the Israel Security Agency.

I will present my detailed position regarding the claims in the draft resolution and the motives behind them in the appropriate forum, in accordance with the law and the decisions of the competent legal authorities, as well as before the citizens of Israel.

In brief, I will say this:

In reality, and contrary to what is claimed, since I assumed office and especially since the beginning of the multi-front war, intensive and effective cooperation has been taking place between the agency under my leadership and the Prime Minister, yielding significant results in counter-terrorism and advancing war objectives.

The Prime Minister has acknowledged this on several occasions, including in public statements. The agency operates to implement the policy determined by the political echelon and will continue to do so. Unfortunately, most of these matters are not disclosed to the government ministers, following a directive from the Prime Minister prohibiting me from holding meetings with ministers over the past year — a directive whose legality is questionable.

Therefore, I was surprised to read in the draft resolution the claim that a lack of trust between the Prime Minister and the agency director impairs the agency’s ability to fulfill its mission. In this context, examples substantiating this unfounded claim should be presented to me. This is particularly relevant given the unprecedented scale and intensity of the Shin Bet’s counter-terrorism efforts during the war, under the political echelon’s guidance, across all fronts, against both terrorism and espionage threats.

The draft resolution also implies a claim of distrust between the Prime Minister and myself concerning the handling of the hostage release issue. Without delving too deeply, I would note that the recent hostage release deal materialized due to a unique operation personally led by me, with the Prime Minister’s knowledge. The deal was achieved according to the goals set by the Prime Minister, brought by him for government approval, and approved with his support.

Against this backdrop, the claim of supposed distrust has no basis — unless the true intention, which I seemingly failed to understand, was to conduct negotiations without reaching an actual deal. In practice, the removal of the Mossad director and myself from leading the negotiations harmed the team and did not advance the hostages’ release. Therefore, the Prime Minister’s claim in this context is unfounded. I reiterate my personal commitment, and that of the agency, to doing everything in our power to bring the hostages back to Israel, whether alive or deceased, particularly during this current window of opportunity.

As part of the process regarding the intention to terminate my tenure, which I hope will proceed lawfully, and in light of the claims in the draft resolution, I will provide a full account of the offensive measures and strategic discussion recommendations arising from my security and strategic perspective that I brought for the Prime Minister’s approval, both before and after October 7. Many of these, he did not advanced.

I will also detail the extensive rehabilitation processes taking place in the Shin Bet, based on lessons learned from the October 7 investigation. Additionally, as is known, a complex, extensive, and highly sensitive investigation is currently underway concerning Qatar’s involvement in Israel’s highest decision-making processes, including the Prime Minister’s Office. I see the full completion of this investigation and the pursuit of truth, regardless of its outcome, as a paramount public duty entrusted to me.

As reported, significant investigative steps are being conducted these days, and undermining them through a hasty and sudden dismissal attempt, supported by inherently baseless arguments, is entirely tainted by improper considerations and personal and institutional conflicts of interest of the highest order.

The dismissal of the agency director at this time, at the Prime Minister’s initiative, sends a message to everyone involved that could jeopardize the optimal pursuit of this investigation. This poses a direct threat to Israel’s security.

Moreover, the agency’s position regarding the urgent security need for a thorough, in-depth, and independent examination of the events of October 7 and the actions that preceded them, implied in the draft resolution as a reason for terminating the agency director’s tenure, is part of the agency director’s duties. In this regard as well, it is not about distrust but rather an improper perception of personal loyalty replacing loyalty to the public. The urgent national need for such an investigation cannot be subordinated to the personal considerations of those involved, as it is the only way to ensure that such a massive systemic failure does not recur.

Above all, I am concerned that the alleged distrust towards me stems from my view that my role, for the sake of decision-making processes at the highest national level, requires me to express professional opinions independently and objectively, even if they occasionally differ from others in the room. This I have done and continue to do regarding the hostages, by proposing and pushing forward unique operational initiatives and promoting war objectives in numerous cases. I did the same before the October 7 massacre by issuing countless warnings to the political echelon. Nonetheless, I emphasize that when my professional opinions were not accepted, I always fully implemented the government’s decisions and policies. This is the Shin Bet ethos I was raised on.

Israel is currently in a particularly difficult and complex period. Fifty-nine hostages remain in the heart of Gaza; Hamas has not been defeated; we are in the midst of a multi-front war; and Iran’s arm reaches deep into the country. Israel is strong, determined, and fighting, but those in public positions bear enormous responsibility. It is bewildering that under these circumstances, the government seeks to take steps that weaken it internally and against its enemies.

As stated, the Shin Bet, as a whole, and I, as its head, will act to fulfill the agency’s duties in accordance with the law and the decisions of the competent legal institutions, as is fitting in a state governed by the rule of law. I have no intention of deviating from this, not by an inch.

I will present my full and detailed response to the claims in the draft resolution and the motives behind them before the appropriate forum, as determined by the competent legal authorities.