Iranian Menace and Western Passivity

Iran has had enough time by now to act as a reasonable nation would and release the British sailors it took hostage without making an international spectacle of their seizure.  But apparently an international spectacle is just what Iran wants. 

Iran is now parading the hostages in front of television cameras and has apparently forced the female hostage, Faye Turney, to "confess" that the sailors strayed into Iranian waters.  Turney is taped wearing an Islamic headscarf, which lends a coercive and creepy feel to the video.  Add to that an unreasonable demand from Iran that Britain admit that the sailors were seized in Iranian waters -- despite GPS readings to the contrary -- and what we have is a genuine international standoff:

Iran's foreign minister said Wednesday that Britain must admit that its 15 sailors and marines entered Iranian waters in order to resolve a standoff over their capture by the Mideast nation.

Manouchehr Mottaki also said Iran would allow British consular officials to visit the troops, but he didn't say when.

Iran's embassy in London said in a statement that the crew was captured just inside Iranian waters.

The embassy released a letter allegedly from Turner addressed to her parents in which she wrote that the British crew had "apparently" entered Iran's territorial waters.

"We were out in the boats when we were arrested by Iranian forces as we had apparently gone into Iranian waters," said the letter, a copy of which was sent to the Associated Press. "I wish we hadn't because then I'd be home with you all right now."

VIDEO: Female sailor says, "Obviously, we trespassed"

The Iranian TV footage showed Turner, 26, in a headscarf talking with someone off camera and, later, smoking a cigarette.

Britain strongly denied Iran's assertions that the crew had entered its waters. British military officials released satellite coordinates that they said showed the crew was 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when it was surrounded by six Iranian gunboats.

Vice Adm. Charles Style said the crew was "ambushed" after conducting "an entirely routine" inspection of a merchant ship. He said the coordinates were confirmed by the Iraqi government and the merchant ship's captain.

Style said the Iranian government had given British officials two different locations for where the incident occurred. Iran's initial account Saturday placed it in Iraqi waters; Iran revised the location Monday, giving another position that placed it 2 nautical miles inside Iranian waters, Style said. Wednesday's statement from the embassy said only that it occurred one-quarter of a nautical mile inside Iranian waters.

Admissions similar to Turner's were made by British naval personnel taken captive by Iran in June 2004 and freed after three days. They recanted after their release.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said Britain was freezing all official business with Iran until the crew is released. That includes suspending any government support for trade missions to Iran and halting visits between the two nations by government officials, with the exception of those needed to resolve the situation with the captive crew.

She said she was concerned about the TV footage of the crew "and any indication of pressure on, or coercion of, our personnel."

. . . .

Iran seized the crew right before the U.N. Security Council voted unanimously for new economic sanctions against Iran for its refusal to halt its uranium enrichment program. The United States and its European allies say Iran is trying to development nuclear weapons. Iran says it wants to use nuclear power for energy alone.

You may recall that parading hostages before cameras and making unreasonable demands is just the sort of thing Iran has a history of doing with Western hostages.  If you are too young to remember, here's a little visual reminder of what America went through when people working at its embassy in Iran were seized and held for 444 days under the well-meaning but weak and ineffectual presidency of Jimmy Carter:

The current British sailor hostage crisis helps explain why I wasn't exactly enthusiastic a few months ago when Iran announced it would pay travel agents bonuses for sending Westerners to Iran, supposedly in a "bid to reach out to ordinary Americans."  Here's what I wrote on November 1, 2006 about that Iranian scheme:

Ready for America Held Hostage, Part 2?

Iran is paying cash incentives for travel agencies to bring Western tourists to Iran -- especially Americans.

Iran has said it would offer cash incentives to travel agencies to encourage Western tourists to visit the country, giving a premium for Americans, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported Tuesday.

The proposal is Iran's latest bid to reach out to ordinary Americans in an attempt by the Islamic Republic's political leadership to show that its quarrel is with the U.S. administration — not U.S. citizens.

It came as the United Nations Security Council deliberates a draft resolution that would impose sanctions on Iran for its disputed nuclear program.

"Iran's tourism department will pay US$20 (€15.7) per person to those who attract European or American tourists to the country," the agency quoted Mohammed Sharif Malakzadeh, deputy head of the department, as saying.

Now just a minute.

Why exactly is Iran suddenly eager to have Americans and other Westerners in its land?

Is it because Iran wants to enjoy more of our Western culture?  Hardly! Iran is busy these days censoring Western music, smashing satellite dishes, and deliberately slowing internet access, all in an effort to keep Western culture out.  . . . .

Is this just a goodwill gesture to help Americans come to know and love Iran?  It's possible, but unlikely.  Keep in mind that "Death to America" is routinely chanted at public gatherings in Iran.  This is the same Iran that just awarded a prize to students who designed a pilotless plane for use in "suicide attacks." 

Besides, if Iran just wanted better P.R. in the U.S., there are plenty of ways to achieve that goal without physically paying to bring isolated random tourists to the country (not even opinion leaders -- just random tourists who may or may not tell anyone about their impressions).  That's an awfully slow way to achieve the ostensible goal of building goodwill.

I see only one reason Iran wants Americans on its soil:  As potential hostages, and as "human shields" in case military options are considered against Iran.

So here we are, less than five months later and -- by golly! -- Iran has taken 15 British sailors hostage. I guess the Western tourist/hostage plan wasn't working out fast enough.

I am not happy to have been right about Iran's willingness to take hostages to get its way. 

I am even less happy because I have been writing for some time that Iran is rapidly advancing its secret nuclear weapons program.  Since nobody in the world community seems to have the courage to stand forcibly between Iran and its nuclear ambitions -- certainly not the U.N. -- this dire prediction of a deadly threat of unprecedented proportions is in the process of becoming a grim reality.

I've also written this:

One of the most awful legacies of the American left ultimately may be that it has undermined American and world support for decisive action to stop Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons until it is too late.  By its relentless attacks on the White House centering around the Iraq war, the left has hobbled the Administration at a time when swift and unanimous action is required.

Unfortunately, that prediction also appears to have come true before our eyes.

We are doing exactly what America swore it would never do again after September 11, 2001 -- we are standing idly by while storm clouds gather and terrorist enemies of decent nations grow stronger.  The Western world must find the courage to deal with the threat from Iran before it matures into a nightmare.  The time left is growing shorter by the day.

Update:  Iran is continuing to escalate the crisis it created.  The female hostage has been forced to write another strangely-worded letter siding with Iran.

_____________________________________________________

Tags:  England English United Kingdom UK navy war hostage hostages female photo crisis blog comment captured 15

Comments

[John Leow]

Hi Gina,

Looks like there's going to be even greater standoffs between Iran and the world in time to come. I didn't hear about Iran using the tantalising offer of bringing Americans in for money, and it seems that the Iranian governement really has a secret counter strategy up its sleeves.

By the way, I've just linked up to your blog, because it's the kind of news blog i want my readers to check out! My blog's a free beginner's guitar blog, for anyone, so you may be interested to add mine to your blogroll collection..

Till then, I look forward to your reply soon!

Regards,
John

[Jim Harrison]

Granted the long history of lying by both the Iranians and the Brits, I don't see why you credit either side. Maybe the enemies of the bad guys are just another kind of bad guys or, more likely, both sides are acting with the bad faith characteristic of nation states. Leave the angels and devils bit to theology, please.

You write that the Iranians represent a "deadly threat of unprecedented proportions," which is just silly unless you really think that the Soviets were a paper tiger all those years. In fact, as an apocalyptic meance, Iran is just the soup of the day. In the last decade, the American right wing has represented China, North Korea, and even hapless Iraq in the same fashion. You guys need to be hysterical about somebody at all times, and you don't seem to notice that Iran is pretty piffling in real-world terms.

And how about just a teeny bit of historical perspective about Iran? Whatever the facts of the latest incident, the Iranians have excellent reason to distrust the British who have been interfering in their domestic affairs since before World War I and the Americans who backed Iraq back in the 80s when our ally Saddam inflicted a million deaths on the Iranians with our help. Don't forget that most of the poison gas attacks of that era were not aimed at Kurds but at Iranians, a fact very conveniently forgotten these days in Washington but not in Tehran.

[DemocracyRules]

FOR THE UK, BECOMING A HOSTAGE COUNTRY IS A CHOICE...

Hostage taking is a millennia-old Middle East strategy that persists because it’s effective in disabling an enemy. The hostages will probably be well-treated (the Muslim hospitality thing), but the coming week is critical, because an immobilizing standoff quickly becomes a status quo, difficult to change, politically, diplomatically, and militarily. Historically, such hostages were held for years, and released after hostilities, with a ransom. This happened in Tehran in 1979, when Muslim fundamentalists overthrew the government, and sponsored ‘students’ to take dozens of US hostages. Jimmy Carter reacted slowly, became immobilized, lost the next election because of it, and Reagan, assuming power, quickly combined posturing, a no revenge policy, and a secret ransom to get them released in 1981. I was struck by the low morale in a US visit in 1980, they were chastened by Vietnam, and defeated by Iran. It took years and a new president to recover. The opportunity in this crisis is to confront it immediately, steadfastly, with planned, escalating steps, a three-day deadline, calling all allies to publicly condemn, emergency meetings of UN security council and NATO, sending aircraft carrier group to Gulf, call for all corporations trading within UK to cease all Iranian contracts, including Shell, Daimler-Benz, and the dozens more that stunningly, continue their Iranian businesses, or face sanctions/fines. In the Islamist vs democracy war, the allies are winning, but not without unremitting pressure, over decades, if necessary. Final steps include 12 GPS bombs dropped 100 feet from Assad’s (Syria) bedroom, insisting that he abdicate within 24 hours, and finally, abandon hope of retrieving hostages, use GPS bombs on Iran’s leaders homes, no ransom, ever. Militarily, Persians (Iranians) are inept cowards. Alexander the Great was outnumbered 10 to 1, and still won, chasing down the Persian king, while his armies scattered in the wind.