Hikers In Iran - Caught in Web of International Poltics
New America Media, Commentary, William O. Beeman, Posted: Aug 03, 2011
Editor’s Note: Two young American hikers have been held as “spies” longer than other foreign nationals there. Will Ramadhan help free them from the perfect web of politics?
American Journalist Shane Bauer and his traveling companion Josh Fattal have been incarcerated in Iran for two years—longer than any other international detainee in the Islamic Republic. There is some hope that they may be released soon.
The month of fasting and prayer—Ramadhan—is now upon us. It is also traditionally a time for forgiveness and clemency, providing a suitable occasion for the Iranian judiciary to let them return home.
Unprecedented Incarceration
The length of their detainment without trial is unprecedented for foreign nationals in Iran, and it has been a puzzle for many as to why they have been held so long.
Past detainees have been held for a few months, sometimes made to “confess” their crimes and released in a show of mercy after all propaganda value had been drained from their cases. Although no answer can be definitive in Bauer and Fattal’s situation, a good guess is that they have been the victims of both internal and international politics.
The two men along with their companion, Sarah Shourd, who was released last year on compassionate medical grounds, were charged with crossing the Iranian border from Iraq without proper documentation. Subsequently they were accused of spying for the United States. Americans have found these charges to lack credibility. However, to take the accusations at face value is to miss the point of their issuance.
Iranian officials know absolutely that there are American operatives in Iran, as well as operatives from Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service. If they didn’t know it, they can only look to the public statements of President George W. Bush, who declared as much. Iranian nuclear scientists have been murdered in Iran; most recently Dariush Rezai, was shot to death on a Tehran street on July 23.
Moreover, Iranians know that the border in Kurdistan over which Bauer, Fattal and Shourd traveled--a popular tourists’ trek—has also been a route for infiltration of spies since the U.S. occupation of Iraq in 2003. They also know that Israel has been courting the Kurds for many years. Iranian Jews, residents in Israel with perfect language and cultural skills, are perfect spies.
“Spies” Like--Some
Thus, the message Iran is trying to send the United States and the world is not that Bauer, Fattal and Shourd are spies, but rather that Iran knows spies are in their country, that these spies are supported by the United States and Israel, and that the spies have entered the country via the route the three hikers took. A show trial is a way to point up these basic facts.
The Iranians were probably also hoping that the three Americans might serve as coins to use in its negotiation with the United States to release a number of Iranians, who had been arrested in Europe for violating trade sanctions--and who seem to be held in secret under U.S. authority.
Such a trial might have taken place in 2009, when the three friends were first detained. However, Iran exploded in political turmoil that year. The presidential election that July turned into a gigantic public protest against President Ahmadinejad and Spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamene’i. In the face of this political upheaval, conducting a show trial of American citizens was not only inconvenient, it threatened to make the government look even worse in the eyes of the world.
Since the government was blaming the United States for the political uprising, to release the hikers would have been seen as capitulating to the forces that Ahmadinejad and Khamene’i claimed were trying to overthrow them.
Internal Iranian politics got worse over the following year. Open rivalry between Ahmadinejad and Khamene’i dominated Iranian politics. The judiciary, under the direction of Khamene’I, may have found it inconvenient to take a line that would seem to be soft on the United States.
Obama Adopts Bush Accusations
Furthermore, in recent months the United States has made things much worse.
The Obama administration has once again returned to three tired accusations that were promulgated by the George W. Bush administration as a way to build support for a possible attack against Iran. These include concerns over Iran’s nuclear program; accusations that Iran was aiding militias in Iraq, who were attacking American troops; and that Iran was aiding al-Qaeda.
All of these claims are very old—and are as insubstantial and specious as they were when first put forward in 2003. One may choose to believe them or not, but it is certain that their reiteration by the Obama administration has not made it any easier for the Iranian government to show clemency toward Bauer and Fattal.
For their sake and the sake of their families and friends one can only hope that the occasion of Ramadhan with its salutary sentiments and message of forgiveness will result in the release of these two young men, who appear not to have deserved their fate.
William O. Beeman is Professor and Chair of Anthropology and specialist in Middle East Studies at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis-St. Paul Minnesota, formerly of Brown University.
Showing posts with label spy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spy. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Monday, December 06, 2010
Diplomatic candor will survive Cablegate--Interview with William O. Beeman (Global Times)
Diplomatic candor will survive Cablegate
Interview with William O. Beeman
Global Times [08:26 December 03 2010]
GT: So the biggest role of WikiLeaks is that it provides an alternative to censored media?
Beeman: That's true. When the Internet started, there were questions about whether it should be regulated.
However, it moved so fast, and turned out unregulated. The technology is available to everyone. These organizations have a very important function as the alternative to the censored media.
GT: Will similar websites appear in the future and engage in competition with WikiLeaks?
Beeman: Absolutely. There is no question that it's going to happen. I'm sure people are right now working on this. This phenomenon is going to spread.
That's not necessarily a bad thing. People will be more careful, and also may become more responsible for their words and actions.
GT: Is it possible that the US government is using Cablegate for diplomatic leverage?
Beeman: I don't think that's the case. In the US, they were pretty angry about Julian Assange. Maybe there is something going on that we don't know about even now. Many scholars and politicians in the US are making wild statements about Assange.
It's very funny that one lawmaker, Michelle Barkman, said Assange should be tried for treason. This is very strange, because Assange is not a US citizen, so nothing he does could be declared treason.
There are so many documents, and they say so many things that anybody who wants to make political points can take one or more of these documents in isolation, and try to make a case for their own ideological positions. They can certainly use it for propaganda.
GT: So do you think Cablegate will initiate a new era of global diplomacy?
Beeman: I think these diplomats always make such statements. There is nothing new about these statements themselves. In diplomatic channels, these sort of private, candid statements were always made.
But now they realize that this is a different world where anything you say is likely to be reported. Anything you do or say at all might get on a camera or a microphone.
What I'm surprised actually is that the people who were quoted in the WikiLeaks documents didn't take more care in trying to protect themselves by printing those things in coded messages or other ways that would keep them from being identified.
I'm sure that people now knowing this could happen are going to be much more careful about how they send their material. But I don't think they will be more careful about what they say, because all human beings like gossip and want to express their personal opinions.
GT: Hundreds of thousands of documents were leaked, but the CIA could only blame a 23-year-old intelligence agent. Is that convincing?
Beeman: They are blaming one agent for having downloaded all these documents and compromised security. We don't know whether he was the only source.
The tendency, unfortunately, is always to find somebody to blame and to find a scapegoat. When a similar scandal happens, it's important for officials to identify somebody right away, so that they can show that they are able to control the situation.
GT: Some former FBI agents say that if WikiLeaks had existed before 2001, perhaps 9/11 would have been prevented.
Beeman: That might be true. That's a very interesting statement, because we knew about the people who carried out the 9/11 and about their organization, in all the way backed in 1998 before the Bush administration came into power. The Bush administration was warned about Al Qaeda.
But they ignored the warnings. And these warnings were turned into secret documents.
If these documents were made public before 2000, then it was very likely that people who carried out the attack would have been discovered.
GT: Do you think WikiLeaks is given too much credit?
Beeman: Eventually these dispatches will be released anyway, likely in 25 years. But many people living today, including politicians, wouldn't be around in 25 years from now.
The reason that the delay is there is exactly that people whose actions are revealed won't be embarrassed, and those government actions that they want to keep secret won't be compromised. But in the US, we have many secret documents, and it's crazy and ridiculous to keep them all secret. There is no strategic interest involved at all.
GT: Are developing countries, with less social stability, more vulnerable to the effects of leaked information? What if false information was included?
Beeman: It could happen. The question we all have to answer is the consequences of information of such value that you are willing to risk: Some degrees of social unrest in order to have that critical information.
When printing the WikiLeaks documents, the newspapers didn't eliminate the names of the individuals who were named in the documents. This could put these people in some danger.
The next question is what is the limits of such information freedom. The public certainly would like to have information that reveals the wrongdoing, like crime, misappropriation of funds, or politicians lying to their own people. Such information should be known by the public.
Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout was recently arrested in Thailand. He provided illicit weapons for illicit government operations. I think people in those countries need to know that. But there are people working as undercover operative with their organizations. If their names were revealed, they might be killed.
GT: So the biggest role of WikiLeaks is that it provides an alternative to censored media?
Beeman: That's true. When the Internet started, there were questions about whether it should be regulated.
However, it moved so fast, and turned out unregulated. The technology is available to everyone. These organizations have a very important function as the alternative to the censored media.
GT: Will similar websites appear in the future and engage in competition with WikiLeaks?
Beeman: Absolutely. There is no question that it's going to happen. I'm sure people are right now working on this. This phenomenon is going to spread.
That's not necessarily a bad thing. People will be more careful, and also may become more responsible for their words and actions.
Interview with William O. Beeman
Global Times [08:26 December 03 2010]
GT: So the biggest role of WikiLeaks is that it provides an alternative to censored media?
Beeman: That's true. When the Internet started, there were questions about whether it should be regulated.
However, it moved so fast, and turned out unregulated. The technology is available to everyone. These organizations have a very important function as the alternative to the censored media.
GT: Will similar websites appear in the future and engage in competition with WikiLeaks?
Beeman: Absolutely. There is no question that it's going to happen. I'm sure people are right now working on this. This phenomenon is going to spread.
That's not necessarily a bad thing. People will be more careful, and also may become more responsible for their words and actions.
GT: Is it possible that the US government is using Cablegate for diplomatic leverage?
Beeman: I don't think that's the case. In the US, they were pretty angry about Julian Assange. Maybe there is something going on that we don't know about even now. Many scholars and politicians in the US are making wild statements about Assange.
It's very funny that one lawmaker, Michelle Barkman, said Assange should be tried for treason. This is very strange, because Assange is not a US citizen, so nothing he does could be declared treason.
There are so many documents, and they say so many things that anybody who wants to make political points can take one or more of these documents in isolation, and try to make a case for their own ideological positions. They can certainly use it for propaganda.
GT: So do you think Cablegate will initiate a new era of global diplomacy?
Beeman: I think these diplomats always make such statements. There is nothing new about these statements themselves. In diplomatic channels, these sort of private, candid statements were always made.
But now they realize that this is a different world where anything you say is likely to be reported. Anything you do or say at all might get on a camera or a microphone.
What I'm surprised actually is that the people who were quoted in the WikiLeaks documents didn't take more care in trying to protect themselves by printing those things in coded messages or other ways that would keep them from being identified.
I'm sure that people now knowing this could happen are going to be much more careful about how they send their material. But I don't think they will be more careful about what they say, because all human beings like gossip and want to express their personal opinions.
GT: Hundreds of thousands of documents were leaked, but the CIA could only blame a 23-year-old intelligence agent. Is that convincing?
Beeman: They are blaming one agent for having downloaded all these documents and compromised security. We don't know whether he was the only source.
The tendency, unfortunately, is always to find somebody to blame and to find a scapegoat. When a similar scandal happens, it's important for officials to identify somebody right away, so that they can show that they are able to control the situation.
GT: Some former FBI agents say that if WikiLeaks had existed before 2001, perhaps 9/11 would have been prevented.
Beeman: That might be true. That's a very interesting statement, because we knew about the people who carried out the 9/11 and about their organization, in all the way backed in 1998 before the Bush administration came into power. The Bush administration was warned about Al Qaeda.
But they ignored the warnings. And these warnings were turned into secret documents.
If these documents were made public before 2000, then it was very likely that people who carried out the attack would have been discovered.
GT: Do you think WikiLeaks is given too much credit?
Beeman: Eventually these dispatches will be released anyway, likely in 25 years. But many people living today, including politicians, wouldn't be around in 25 years from now.
The reason that the delay is there is exactly that people whose actions are revealed won't be embarrassed, and those government actions that they want to keep secret won't be compromised. But in the US, we have many secret documents, and it's crazy and ridiculous to keep them all secret. There is no strategic interest involved at all.
GT: Are developing countries, with less social stability, more vulnerable to the effects of leaked information? What if false information was included?
Beeman: It could happen. The question we all have to answer is the consequences of information of such value that you are willing to risk: Some degrees of social unrest in order to have that critical information.
When printing the WikiLeaks documents, the newspapers didn't eliminate the names of the individuals who were named in the documents. This could put these people in some danger.
The next question is what is the limits of such information freedom. The public certainly would like to have information that reveals the wrongdoing, like crime, misappropriation of funds, or politicians lying to their own people. Such information should be known by the public.
Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout was recently arrested in Thailand. He provided illicit weapons for illicit government operations. I think people in those countries need to know that. But there are people working as undercover operative with their organizations. If their names were revealed, they might be killed.
GT: So the biggest role of WikiLeaks is that it provides an alternative to censored media?
Beeman: That's true. When the Internet started, there were questions about whether it should be regulated.
However, it moved so fast, and turned out unregulated. The technology is available to everyone. These organizations have a very important function as the alternative to the censored media.
GT: Will similar websites appear in the future and engage in competition with WikiLeaks?
Beeman: Absolutely. There is no question that it's going to happen. I'm sure people are right now working on this. This phenomenon is going to spread.
That's not necessarily a bad thing. People will be more careful, and also may become more responsible for their words and actions.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Minnesota Public Radio--Three detained American hikers will be tried in Iranian court.
Three detained American hikers will be tried in Iranian court.
Minnesotan Shane Bauer and two friends Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal were arrested after crossing the Iran, Iraq border in July.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the three Americans accidentially crossed the unmarked border. But, Iranian officials claim that the three had "suspicious aims."
University of Minnesota anthropology professor William Beeman talked with All Things Considered about the situation. Beeman is an expert in Iranian culture and is the author of "The 'Great Satan' vs. the 'Mad Mullahs': How the U.S. and Iran Demonize Each Other."
Minnesotan Shane Bauer and two friends Sarah Shourd and Josh Fattal were arrested after crossing the Iran, Iraq border in July.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says the three Americans accidentially crossed the unmarked border. But, Iranian officials claim that the three had "suspicious aims."
University of Minnesota anthropology professor William Beeman talked with All Things Considered about the situation. Beeman is an expert in Iranian culture and is the author of "The 'Great Satan' vs. the 'Mad Mullahs': How the U.S. and Iran Demonize Each Other."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

