Many details of NUMEC’s Israel dealings still shrouded in secrecy |
Valley News Dispatch

Many details of NUMEC’s Israel dealings still shrouded in secrecy

Mary Ann Thomas
Evelyn and Zalman Shapiro

Zalman Shapiro, the late renowned nuclear scientist who founded the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp. in Apollo, waited almost 50 years to reveal his involvement in the Six Day War.

And he did it not to take credit for his work, which almost certainly helped give Israel an edge over its Arab adversaries, but in an effort to clear his name.

In exclusive interviews with the Tribune-Review before his death in July, Shapiro told of at least some of his covert work for Israel and the United States, which he kept secret from media accounts and public statements released by government agencies for most of his life.

Shapiro was an accomplished scientist who helped develop fuel for the world’s first nuclear submarine. But he and NUMEC were dogged by allegations of illegally providing nuclear material to Israel for its secret nuclear weapons program.

Shapiro, who denied the allegations until his death, never was charged with any crime and never lost his U.S. government security clearances during the numerous government investigations.

Curiously, details on NUMEC’s supply of intelligence equipment to Israel and the United States weren’t made public during those investigations.

Nor has the State of Israel confirmed Shapiro’s contribution.

Requests for comment for this story from the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C., and Israel’s Defense Forces went unanswered.

Although public records for the secret surveillance devices Shapiro helped to make are scant, a report from Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission confirms NUMEC supplied Israel with the nuclear batteries in 1966, a year before the Six Day War, for “under­sea or surface” use.

Sections of the report about specific uses for the batteries were left blank, but Shapiro said those batteries powered listening devices that allow Israel to listen in on Arab military communications leading up the the Six Day War.

Because most of Shapiro’s FBI files still are classified for national security reasons, it is unlikely the public will ever know the full scope of Shapiro’s activities with Israel’s Ministry of Defense and the U.S. government.

Shapiro never discussed his batteries for Israel in FBI and other government interviews.

At least the ones made public.

That didn’t do much for Shapiro’s image and fueled allegations that he was engaged in illegal activities with Israel, especially because government investigators in 1965 said NUMEC was “missing” 200 pounds of weapons-grade uranium and rumors were swirling in intelligence circles that Shapiro may have given the material to Israel to power a covert nuclear weapons program.

At a 1978 hearing before U.S. Sen. Morris Udall’s Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, Shapiro admitted knowing Meir Amit, formerly a top spy for Israel, but denied knowing any other Israeli intelligence operators.

“(Shapiro’s) denial was unnecessarily unequivocal, and probably a lie, since we know that Israeli intelligence officials visited NUMEC,” said Henry Myers, former aide to Udall, in a letter to the senator.

When pressed during a Tribune-Review interview about why so few details were available publicly about the visits of Israelis to NUMEC and their intelligence projects, Shapiro explained that the Israelis wanted to keep their missions secret.

“Meir Amit felt that our State Department was going to reveal the fact to Egypt that we were listening in and would know what was going on and warn Egypt,” Shapiro said.

“It was obviously secret,” he said.

Mary Ann Thomas is a Tribune-Review staff writer. She can be reached at 724-226-4691, [email protected] or via twitter @MaThomas_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.