Iran has come under heavy critism from British and UN officails recently after they seized 15 Biritsh Marines that they alledge were trespassing in Iranian waters.
The navy personnel, who include one woman, were seized at gunpoint by forces said to be Iranian Revolutionary Guards, after inspecting an Iraqi boat and returning to their two small boats to head back to the HMS Cornwall
The Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that the detaining of these people was "unjustified and wrong" he also denied at a UN conference that the marines even went into Iranian waters.
Meanwhile, the German presidency of the European Union has demanded the immediate release of the personnel.
Iran however claims that the British marines havs admitted to trespassing in Iranian waters and have refused to allow the UK or UN any contact with the detainees and have said that they are concidering legal action against the detainees and some have called for them to be put on trial.
The UK representative to the UN, Sir Emyr Jones Parry, told the BBC that he hoped to raise the subject with Irans foreign minister at a recent UN confereance but was prevented from doing so by the extended debate on Irans nuclear programme.
Sir Emyr Jones Parry said "I would have wished very much to have had the opportunity to approach the foreign minister and simply ask for the release of those sailors. Unfortunately, he allowed the debate to continue for 90 minutes before he joined us. He then assailed us for 40 minutes and then left before anyone else, and was shepherded out of the building."
However with Iran refusing to allow the UK or the UN any contact with the detainees it cant be verified whether or not the Britiah marines actually went into Iranian waters or not.
Professor Sadaq Ziba-Kalam, of Tehran University, told the BBC he did not think the marines would be charged with spying. He said "That part of the water between Iran and Iraq where the incident happened has been disputed for decades, so it is very difficult to draw the line and say this is the Iranian side of the border and this is the Iraqi side of the border."
However this incident, added to the on-going hostilities between Iran and the UN over Irans nuclear programme, has just served to raise more tention in this already tense relationship between the UN and Iran.
Recently the UN Security Council voted unanimously in favour of further sanctions against Iran for its refusal to suspend its nuclear enrichment programme.
White Tiger said this in post #1 : The Prime Minister Tony Blair has said that the detaining of these people was "unjustified and wrong" he also denied at a UN conference that the marines even went into Iranian waters.
The problem with Tony Blair is he's lied so much and so often his credibility is shot to pieces so who believes anything he says. When he uses words like "unjustified" and "wrong" I'm more inclined to believe the opposite just because he's saying them.
And does the British government realise "demanding" the release of these sailors just shows how impotent and weak we really are in the region. We're hardly in a great position to be barking orders at Iran.
To hell with policy, diplomacy and wether Tony Blair is a lair or night they have our men illegally that pice of water in not Irans or Iraqs it's always been disputed a dispute that has never been resolved.
So maybe we stop looking weak and start to up the ante a little for starters let stick 2 battleships outside Iranian international waters ditto with tornadoes in airspace not to do anything but it will send a message. Then lets start a UN resolution declaring that strech of water to become Iraq waters saying that recent events prove Iran cannot be trusted to police it correctly, of course these resolutions take time so while we wait we arrest any Iranian army boats that end up in the area for the same reason our lot are being held. If all else fail we take a caluculated risk by bombing the revolutionary guards HQ if that fails fine we use our spies find out where the sailors and soldiers are then we send in the SAS or SBS to bust them out.
Like I said Iran are the aggressors they acted illegally that means that we can and should use any means possible to get our people back.
Also why has the Iranina embassy not been kicked out of the UK they have made it obvious they don't want to help so kick them out they are hardly allies or neutral countries in this.
lodgebo said this in post #3 : Like I said Iran are the aggressors they acted illegally that means that we can and should use any means possible to get our people back.
Is the legality important to you because Iran say we acted illegally and are the aggressors? We are not at war with Iran so there is no reason to think these sailors will be harmed. That would certainly change if we started bombing the Revolutionary Guards HQ.
And when I say the UK government looks weak, I'm talking about making demands we can't back up, and we can't back them up because we are already involved in two wars in this area and to start another front would be a disaster, and would do nothing to get these sailors back.
A deliberate decision to escalate tensions in the region also carries far more risks for Iran than for the other players in this dangerous drama. The new UN resolution passed the Security Council by 15-0. Iran received no protection from Russia or China. Outside the UN, Iran is increasingly isolated. Arab states such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan are increasingly open in their hostility. It is now in Iranian interests to promote diplomacy.
Opportunities for Iran to take the diplomatic route do exist. The hawks in Washington – who were pressing for military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities – are on the defensive. The diplomats at the State Department, who favour negotiations, want high-level talks with Iran and Syria, possibly next month. Any diplomatic opening would certainly be more limited than Iran wants. There would be no direct bilateral contacts and the talks would focus initially on Iraq alone. But, if they went well, they could surely be expanded to take in Iranian security concerns, maritime boundaries and – above all – the nuclear issue. Further brinkmanship is in nobody’s interests.
This isn't the first time Iran has taken British personnel unlawfully. It happend a few years ago and the Iranians forced the captured British servicemen, blindfolded, to confess to tresspassing on Iranian TV and then released them.
The powers that be in Iran have backed themselves into a corner. They have very few supporters in the world wide scheme of things and seem intent on making enemies of the US, the UK and the UN.
The problem that we have, as well, is that there are at least three different parties that control Iran without caring about the other two so whatever happens you cant be sure whether or not you are working with the party that can do anything about the situation or not.
"there's only one way to win a war: shout, shout, and shout again!" - The Duke of Wellington ((Blackadder - Stephen Fry))
White Tiger said this in post #6 :
[B]This isn't the first time Iran has taken British personnel unlawfully.
Where's the evidence that they were taken unlawfully? Both sides are giving contradictory statements. I've read reports that we have already carried out military operations inside Iran, and who would be surprised if we hadn't infiltrated certain areas of the Iran in preparation for any future attacks.
If the Iranian government can prove, without a shodow off doubt, that the British personnel did invade their waters and were openly hostile about doing so, as the Iranians claim, the I will retract that statement you have highlighted h@ts and appologise for saying it, however if the Iranians arrested the British personnel in waters that were either Iraqi waters or neutral waters then that statement will be perfectly valid.
The fact of the matter is that I don't know everything about this situation so I cannot give you any evidence either for or against that statement. However what I can tell you is that both the Iranians and the British claim to have evidence supporting their side of the arguement.
If the British personnel were returning to HMS Cornwall after inspecting an Iraqi ship then it leads me to these questions, was the Iraqi ship in Iranian waters? If so why were the sailors on the Iraqi ship not detained along with the British?
If the ships in that area are inspected in the same way as they are here then the whole procedure would have been watched carefully from the Cornwall itself so unless the men and women on the Cornwall weren't doing there job then there is every reason to assume that the incident occured in either the neutral waters between the Iranian and Iraqi waters or the Iraqi waters themself.
If that is the case then the seisure of the British personnel was unlawful.
"there's only one way to win a war: shout, shout, and shout again!" - The Duke of Wellington ((Blackadder - Stephen Fry))
White Tiger said this in post #8 : The fact of the matter is that I don't know everything about this situation so I cannot give you any evidence either for or against that statement. However what I can tell you is that both the Iranians and the British claim to have evidence supporting their side of the arguement.
So why should we automatically presume the Iranians are lying and the British are telling the truth? Our relations with Iran may be strained because of Iraq, but we are not at war with them.
Blair uses terms like "unjustified" and "wrong". Blair's a lawyer and he knows there is a big difference between the above terms and the term "unlawful". Have any British politicians come out and said the arrests were actually "unlawful"? Or are they skipping around the term?
Iran has said this could have been an accidental incursion into Iranian waters, which sounds like they are attempting to diffuse the tension before it gets any worse.
So why should we automatically presume the Iranians are lying and the British are telling the truth? Our relations with Iran may be strained because of Iraq, but we are not at war with them.
Blair uses terms like "unjustified" and "wrong". Blair's a lawyer and he knows there is a big difference between the above terms and the term "unlawful". Have any British politicians come out and said the arrests were actually "unlawful"? Or are they skipping around the term?
Iran has said this could have been an accidental incursion into Iranian waters, which sounds like they are attempting to diffuse the tension before it gets any worse.
Perhaps if you read the second to last paragraph of my last post then you will see that I have already said why it is assumed that the Biritsh are telling the truth and the Iranians lying.
However I shall reiterate for you.
If the ships in that area are inspected in the same way as they are here then the whole procedure would have been watched carefully from the Cornwall itself so unless the men and women on the Cornwall weren't doing there job then there is every reason to assume that the incident occured in either the neutral waters between the Iranian and Iraqi waters or the Iraqi waters themself.
and if Iran has said that the British personnell accidentally invaded their waters the why are they still detaining them? Why haven't they let the UK contact the detainees? and why are they talking about pressing legal charges against the British personnel and the UK?
"there's only one way to win a war: shout, shout, and shout again!" - The Duke of Wellington ((Blackadder - Stephen Fry))
Also it has come out that there was a Sea King helicoptor monitoring the boats position now if those boats had crossed a line eitheer the GPS in the Cornwall or the eyes in the SEa king would have let them know.
Oh and I wish people would staop calling it Iranian waters it is disputed waters Iraq nd Iran have been arguing about ownership for years.
Also why should we belive that UK over Iran simple Iran have pulled this crap before remember.
And the Iranians if they are telling the truth that the boats where in thier agreed area, that they were spying well simple prove it lets see your evidence you are the aggressor show us eveidence for being aggresive. Also the troops are being treated weel and looked after again prove it let the UK embassy or the red cross see them because I have serious doubts after the last time remember mock executions daily beatings I would not be surprised if the female has been raped already.
Oh and the word unlawfull has been used by at least one MOD officla and I belive Tony Blair used it when he threatend phase 2 is on the cards.
Quite frankly I can't belive that there are people in thos country that either want to sit on thier asses and do nothing or make call into account or sailors credibility, now obvioulsy because of isues like Iraq and the cinduct of Tony Blair people will act like that but if you ask me they need to unconnect the dots they have made in thier minds. This is not about Iraq or Tony Blair it's about unlawful arrest plain and simple and every person in this country should be outraged about this and should be prepared to let Tony Blair and the MOD do what thiey are leagally entilted to do and that would be phase 4 get a UN resolution and lets us go and get out troops home.
You can't separate this incident from the credibility issue Blair has, and the complete lack of trust many people have in him and anything he says.
If as Blair now says he has evidence to prove the sailors were in Iraqi water he should present it and we can get past this initial phase of this incident. Likewise the Iranians should do the same. The difference between the two countries is that this incident happened off the Iranian coast NOT the English channel.
As for people sitting on their arses, there are diplomatic talks going on all over the place. Even the Germans authorities summoned the Iranian ambassador in Germany to demand the release of these sailors.
h@ts said this in post #12 : You can't separate this incident from the credibility issue Blair has, and the complete lack of trust many people have in him and anything he says.
I have to disagree. Iran kidnapped these sailors and as a result Blair as the leader of this country was dragged into this arguement. His credibility is as much an issue in this as his approach to say the NHS it's all seperate incidents. All I can say is in this situation I am glad Blair is in charge of the country could you imagine if somebody like say the Lib Dems Menzies campbell was in charge of this incident, we need somebody who is prepared to get tough if we need to be.
If as Blair now says he has evidence to prove the sailors were in Iraqi water he should present it and we can get past this initial phase of this incident.
And what good would it do, do you think Iran would be " oh sorry our mistake off you go boys" no chance they would still want an investigation and a trial and everything tht goes with it. The Iranians are the aggressors they are making the charges they need to be submitting the evidence plain and simple. It would also suit them to do that, most of the world are angry about what they are doing so submit the evidence prove us all wrong and we have not a leg to stand on.
The difference between the two countries is that this incident happened off the Iranian coast NOT the English channel.
I don't give a damn where it happend what I care about is 15 kidnapped British personnel and thier visual proof of thier well being. But you make an intresting point though never in a million years would we treat Iranian "trespassers" they are treating our troops. One thing I know the UK would not do would be dargging our heels on an issue with this much heat around it.
As for people sitting on their arses, there are diplomatic talks going on all over the place. Even the Germans authorities summoned the Iranian ambassador in Germany to demand the release of these sailors.
What I was talking about are thjose that are taking a wait and see approach and are more than ready to attack Blair as face up to the reality of what is going on. however when Germany, other middle east countries and apprently even Syria privatly are trying to get these sailors released that maybe they know Iran is acting up and that these people have indeed been kidnapped.
The BBC are running an on-going thing with this and recently BBC Radio 4 interviewed Dr Ali Pahlavan, the editor of Iran News, an independent newspaper published in Tehran, on this situation this is what he had to say.
quote:
The suspicion is that they are in Tehran. The only official government line is that they crossed into Iranian territorial waters and confessed to it.
My understanding of the situation is that this could be a reaction to the UN sanctions which were passed two days ago... the revolutionary guards had promised that some sort of reaction would be forthcoming from Iran.
The revolutionary guards are a very hard line, ultra-conservative wing of the regime who believe that the US and Britain need to be challenged in the Persian Gulf and in the Middle East... their interests need to be challenged in Palestine, in Lebanon, in Iraq and elsewhere.
So this could be part of the strategy to challenge the British and American supremacy in this part of the world which is troubling. It could lead to confrontation and be a trigger and which could lead to escalation.
Two years ago when British sailors were seized, there was a different Iranian government which was more moderate and more reformist.
But now the revolutionary guard is the government; it is very different situation as the crisis over the nuclear issue is at a very critical stage... the revolutionary guards are of the view that the UK and the US should be pushed and their interests need to be threatened. So this is a serious situation.
But the British are more diplomatically astute and understand Persia... if it was American servicemen or the American marines, this could have led to war.
So there is some hope - at least on my part - that believes in a few days or a few weeks this could be resolved. But then again you never know.
I am worried because it's very different than the 2004 incident. The revolutionary guard is the government now.
So it is troubling and it is worrying. Many of us analysts had predicted an incident in the Persian Gulf, which is very crucial to the global economy and to Western interests and could trigger something disastrous.
How are most Iranian people reacting to the situation?
We can't really assess it because right now in Iran it's the Persian New Year holidays and most people are on vacation. Offices are closed and the city of Tehran, which is the political heart of the country.
But if the situation escalates and continues to be the kind of crisis that I think it is, this could be very troubling.
"there's only one way to win a war: shout, shout, and shout again!" - The Duke of Wellington ((Blackadder - Stephen Fry))
lodgebo said this in post #13 :
never in a million years would we treat Iranian "trespassers" they are treating our troops. One thing I know the UK would not do would be dargging our heels on an issue with this much heat around it.
Putting aside these 15 sailors for a minute, what you say about how we would treat foreign suspects is not true. There are secret prisons in Europe where kidnapped suspects are taken and tortured. Blair and therefore the British government turned a blind eye to the American extraordinary rendition flights that landed and took off in Britain.
Plus Blair has dragged his heals in regard to America's illegal imprisonment and torture, of suspects in Guantanamo Bay, many of them British citizens, who have subsequently been released without charge after years of imprisonment.
If this incident with the 15 sailors is as White Tiger's post says, a push by the revolutionary guard to test our supremacy then we are in serious trouble.
Blair says he will release information today that proves the sailors were in Iraqi water. Once that has happened I don't see what the Iranians can do but release the sailors?
03-25-2007 10:35 PM
