Which U.S. police and federal agencies have official memorandums or contracts documenting training exchanges with Israeli institutions?
Executive summary
Multiple U.S. law-enforcement agencies and federal entities — including local police departments (NYPD, LAPD and others), federal agencies (FBI and ICE are repeatedly named in reporting), and multi‑jurisdictional programs run through universities and nonprofits — have participated in documented training exchanges with Israeli institutions, often organized by intermediaries such as the Anti‑Defamation League (ADL), JINSA and the Georgia International Law Enforcement Exchange (GILEE) [1] [2] [3] [4]. Public reporting, leaked police archives and organizational disclosures show formal programs and sustained ties, but the sources do not provide a comprehensive catalog of signed memorandums of understanding (MOUs) or full contracts for every agency, and some defenders of the exchanges insist the programs are limited in scope and not field‑training partnerships [5] [2].
1. Institutional intermediaries that built the pipeline: ADL, JINSA and GILEE
For decades the primary conduits for U.S.–Israel police exchanges have been non‑governmental and university programs: the Anti‑Defamation League, the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) and the Georgia International Law Enforcement Exchange (GILEE) — each of which has organized trips or conferences sending U.S. officers to meet Israel National Police, IDF and other security services — and which organizers acknowledge have been used by hundreds or thousands of American officers [1] [2] [6] [3].
2. Local police departments with documented participation
Reporting lists dozens of U.S. municipal and county police agencies whose officers attended exchanges or Israel‑facing trainings: examples cited across sources include the New York Police Department (which maintains a counterterrorism liaison presence in Israel), the Los Angeles Police Department and Los Angeles County sheriffs, Minneapolis and other city police departments, and Baltimore — with trips sometimes paid by the intermediary organizations or by public funds [7] [6] [8] [3]. Leaked archives and investigative pieces identify specific cohorts and trips, but they do not uniformly reproduce signed interagency contracts for each local department [5] [6].
3. Federal agencies and national law‑enforcement bodies named in reporting
Multiple outlets cite participation by federal agencies or agents in exchanges or programs: the FBI, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and Customs/Border‑related personnel — often named as attendees in conferences, briefings or exchanges facilitated by U.S. organizations and Israeli hosts [4] [9] [10]. The Guardian’s reporting on leaked BlueLeaks materials shows U.S. police agencies received intelligence and training materials sourced from the IDF and Israeli think tanks, indicating operational flows of information between Israeli institutions and U.S. law enforcement [5]. That reporting documents document transfers and trainings, but it does not in all cases reproduce formal bilateral MOUs or procurement contracts between U.S. federal agencies and Israeli security services.
4. Formal offices and sustained bilateral ties: the NYPD example
A concrete example of a formalized tie is the NYPD’s counterterrorism office in Israel — a sustained presence at Israeli police headquarters reported as an established arrangement — which indicates more than ad hoc travel or single‑conference attendance [7]. This case demonstrates that some relations go beyond single exchanges to institutional liaisons, but public reporting does not include copies of the underpinning diplomatic agreements or memorandums made available for every such presence.
5. Contesting narratives and documented limits in the record
Organizers and defenders argue exchanges are seminars focused on counterterrorism, not hands‑on field tactics, and JINSA has publicly contested allegations that its programs teach arrest mechanics or violent holds [2]. Critics — including Jewish Voice for Peace, Amnesty International and the Deadly Exchange campaign — have compiled lists of departments and officials who attended these programs and argue that tactics and technologies spread back into U.S. policing [11] [10] [3]. Leaked files reported by The Guardian and investigative outlets provide documentary evidence of intelligence sharing and promoted trainings, but reporters and researchers caution that the publicly available sources do not amount to a single public registry of MOUs or bilateral contracts covering every listed agency [5] [1].
6. What the public record proves — and what it does not
The weight of reporting shows repeated, institutionalized exchanges involving numerous U.S. police departments, federal agencies (FBI, ICE named repeatedly), and intermediary organizations who organized trips or hosted Israeli officials; documents and leaks corroborate transfer of materials and a standing NYPD presence in Israel [1] [5] [7] [4]. What the cited sources do not supply in full — and therefore cannot be definitively claimed across the board — is a complete set of signed memorandums or procurement contracts for each agency: some relationships are demonstrably formal (e.g., NYPD liaison), others are documented through travel records, program rosters, emails and leaked training files rather than released MOUs [5] [1] [6]. Given the patchwork nature of reporting, any definitive legal inventory of MOUs/contracts would require direct records requests or disclosures from the agencies themselves.