TheOldSchool, Daniyel,
et al,
Believe me when I say, that the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) within the US Department of State (DOS) has taken all of it "Lessons Learned" to heart. And some of these "Lessons Learned" came at a very high price.
Or maybe learning from Israel.
(CONTEXT)
First, I think that every Security Service in the world has learned something from the various Israeli Security institutions. America is not alone in that. But Israel is not the exclusive teacher --- and --- has made its share of mistakes. No nation
(operating in the multitude of diverse and changing environments like the US) has a security service with a perfect record.
Second --- the current Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security (Greg Starr), has more than just passing experience with Israel and the Palestinian issue. He was once the Senior
Regional Security Officer (RSO) at the US Embassy to
Israel.
(COMMENT)
While I don't necessarily agree with all the policies and method of operations employed by DS, that is a far cry from saying that DS does not know what they are doing. In fact they know exactly what they are doing and have a firm decision making process for how they derived the decisions that they implement.
DOS provides safe, secure and functional facilities that represent the US Government to the host nation (speaking of non-DOD activities). With very few exceptions, the overseas facilities utilize to varying degrees, host nation citizens in security positions. And yes, many of them are armed and yes, many have been sent to the US for addition training. What is being described in the referenced Israel News Article, is nothing at all unusual for the DOS to pursue.
Remembering that the use of host nation personnel has undergone various level of review, risk assessments, and vetting processes, that are commensurate with the positions nominated.
There are any number of reasons I could mention in which one could legitimately criticize DS; but none of them are mentioned in the article.
Again, you may not agree with them (DS), but that doesn't mean they don't understand what they are doing. They have just taken an alternative path. They understand the risks very well; but the also understand the politics as well.
Most Respectfully,
R