Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Iran Releases US Sailors
The US Navy confirmed their release:
Ten U.S. Navy Sailors safely returned to U.S. custody today, after departing Iran,” the United States Naval Forces Central Command in Bahrain said in a statement. “There are no indications that the sailors were harmed during their brief detention.”
I know we’re all immensely relieved for them and their families.
I have no idea what that was all about. And stories like this make me feel I can’t know what it’s about. I assume they were seized because someone in the Revolutionary Guards wanted to create an embarrassing incident for Obama and Kerry — or maybe for Zarif and Rouhani. If so, it seems highly likely that they were trying to queer the nuclear deal. But why now, why after they removed the core of the heavy water reactor at Arak? Why would you do that and then not take the money?
It seems highly likely that they were released because they were instructed to do so by someone with more power.
Or maybe the boat really did just have a mechanical problem.
If they were trying to send the US a signal, they failed. I’m the US. We’re going to elect a new government pretty soon, so Iran’s got to send its signal to us, not Obama and Kerry. And I don’t have a clue what they’re trying to tell me.
I’m glad the sailors are safe.
Published in Foreign Policy, General
Claire,
The Iranians are trying to send a signal by doing this, but not to Obama or Kerry or you or me or any other American.
We are irrelevant, and that is the signal they are trying to send to the rest of the world.
This turns out to not be the case.
Roberto,
Let’s get anonymous in on this. The article you linked sounds like the Chinese are being contracted by the Iranians to do “modifications” on the reactor before they go ahead with the concrete.
One wonders just what possibilities this opens up. I wouldn’t trust Kerry or Wendy Sherman to make hotel reservations much less guarantee no nukes in Iran for 1 year much less 15 years.
Regards,
Jim
Susan is right, IMO. The mistake Obama and Kerry continually make is assuming that these people are ever reading from the same playbook. They are not. What we would see as rational they see as weakness. What they see as rational, we see as barbaric.
Oh, I agree about the political outlooks. There really is a difference & there is no way you all are going to get along. It is sometimes useful to deny the difference, sometimes useful to recognize it, & sometimes useful to exaggerate it! Deception & prudence are as much requirements for democrats as for the kind of oligarchy that runs Iran!
But let us admit that Iranians are far smarter or rational about Americans than the other way around: After all, they did not invade the Soviet embassy in ’79! Nor did they try stunts like that in the ’80s. They were not advertising humiliating America in 2003–but by 2006 they again learned which what the wind was blowing.
They sure are smarter than the current crop of Americans occupying this administration! But then, so is that squirrel outside my window.
Americans have been underestimating Muslim rulers at least since Eisenhower. Skip tells me Ike bitterly regretted threatening to destroy the British & French economies because they were willing to help themselves & the Jews in ’56 in the Suez crisis. Thanks, Ike! Somehow, you saw that threatening your war time allies with horrible suffering is not a good idea! Yer grand!
Reagan did next to nothing to make things better in the Middle East & took some horrible punches. I guess it’s a better record than most of your presidents.
How about Nixon? There’s a tough nut to crack. Mr. Realism who opened China while waltzing Kissinger, whose concern with foreign affairs led him to never learn a foreign language. Or maybe I’m doing him an injustice & he read Bismarck’s memoirs in the original? Either way, the Arabs say the oil prices go up & Tricky Dick says, Thank you, sir, may I have another! Were your politicians worried you were not paying enough to regimes sponsoring the murder of Jews & Americans & whoever else?
How about Mr. Bush? Helluva realist–making sure Mr. Anti-America does not lose his regime in the Gulf War. The guy reciprocated helping the first attack on WTC.
Savvy characters, tough as nails-
Iranian TV is making a big deal of showing the sailors being fed what frankly looks like a great meal. And the sailors looked unafraid and maybe a bit amused. So they clearly wanted to convey that they had treated them with the traditional hospitality owed to guests — which is a real matter of pride in this region; you lose face if your foreign guests aren’t well fed — and I doubt they mistreated or threatened them. But the cameras also panned over many weapons that they arrayed and filmed for some propaganda purpose.
I don’t understand Farsi, but I’d assume the point they were trying to convey was, “Look, we were completely justified in interdicting this vessel and as you can see it wasn’t just a lost pleasure craft, but we were exquisitely polite to them.” Why they felt the need to stress this to their own citizens, I’m not sure. I would guess it means they think their citizens would be deeply unhappy if they believed the IRG had done anything to upset the deal, but I’m speculating wildly.
Now that they’re safely out of danger, I assume they’ll be talking about that meal for a long time, because that looked like a very fine banquet they laid on for them.
Imagine you are a Jordanian foreign analyst, or Indian, or Taiwanese, etc. and you saw this image this morning:
Add the fact that the American Secretary of State proceeded to thank the Iranians for releasing prisoners they never should have taken.
Which nation would you consider, in Osama’s phrase, “the strong horse?”
Perhaps something along these lines:
No doubt.
Roberto,
Curiouser and curiouser says Alice in Iran Deal Land. There always has been the question of whether there is any deal whatsoever. Deals require consideration for both parties. We (meaning real American interests as opposed to BHO imaginary interests) gain absolutely nothing by the “Deal”.
It seems the Iranians fear Congress retaining the sanctions. I think that is the best of all reasons to retain the sanctions.
Regards,
Jim
Look at the boats that captured our boys (and gal). https://twitter.com/Hassanvand/status/687296109484572672
They are dwarfed by the Riverine boats, which often have .50 cal machine guns and mini-guns. They’re also fast as hell. Pay close attention to the last few moments of the video. The Iranian vessels look like something you take out on the weekend. Our boats look scary as hell. I bet our men and woman were under orders to give up at first sign of trouble.
I can’t wait until President Cruz sinks half the Iranian Navy next time they try something like this. There is zero reason to tolerate this sort of behavior. Our Navy dominates the seas. We ought to act like it.
This story really doesn’t add up, does it?
Iran urinated on Obama’s fire hydrant on day of his big speech. That’s it. Insolent and intentional timing.
Maybe they were just trying to get your lunch money & the rest was an unhappy complication? Possibly, someone forgot to say uncle?
Everybody who enjoys it when Titus goes Full D’Artagnan like this!!
Susan – rationality is likely common, but base assumptions may differ.
In this case, I have to say I am sympathetic to the Iranians – I think they acted rationally both in detaining the sailors and in releasing them in two days after a good meal.
Because I do question the (apparent) assumptions that:
.
By detaining, feeding and swiftly releasing the sailors I think the Govt of Iran was communicating (to the world/US and to its own people):
Iran doesn’t want confrontation – quite the opposite – but that does not mean it has become a pushover wrt defending its borders after signing the nuclear deal.
This story is fishy. First of all, the Navy sailor who apologized to Iran on camera violated the Navy code of conduct. If you are a service member detained/arrested/captured by a foreign country, under no circumstances should you say anything other than your name and rank. In other words, you do not give them what they want. I don’t for the life of me understand why he agreed to speak on camera, unless he was coerced. The officer corps is trained to not do that. Therefore, neither Iran or the Obama administration is playing “nice.” In addition, that young man’s career is over with the U.S. Navy. So, there are some losers in the this. Frankly, the entire chain of command up to the Secretary of the Navy should be fired over this fiasco. Check out what Navy folks in the know think about it.
Forgive me, but I find this an astonishing statement.
The Iranian regime has been seeking confrontation with the United States ever since it seized power, beginning immediately. They refrain from confronting us only on the occasions we notice enough to confront them back. Otherwise, they are continually committing terrorists acts against us, supporting our enemies, and generally working against us. This latest provocation takes place soon after we agreed to give them billions of dollars, and much else.
So I disagree that Iran doesn’t want confrontation. They plainly want it, or otherwise they could have warned away these small boats with a loud speaker.
Thank you Karen for speaking the hard truth. It’s a shameful day for the military’s officer corps. The navy captain or lieutenant (I’ve heard both ranks in reports) utterly debased himself and his country. And by all appearances, he did so without coercion in the very short span of captivity.
Unfortunately, I fear that most Americans are so unflinchingly pro-military, that very little criticism will be leveled against him.
Say what you want about John McCain, but he suffered unspeakable torture for years rather than speak ill of his country. Our modern officers are treated to Persian cuisine and immediately apologize.
Fair call – doesn’t want confrontation now, or today, or perhaps even any more, may be more accurate.
Though again – they might feel the same way about the West/US, and with some justification too.
We didn’t agree to give them anything. It’s. Their. Money.
Well, I guess they want to make a “don’t tread on me” point. Which is not a confrontation, more a testy *ahem*.
There was a message being sent, but it wasn’t to us. It was to any country in the region which is delusional enough to think that the U.S. will act as guarantors of peace and stability if it means that this administration has to do anything more involved than sending diplomatic notes.
We won’t even defend ourselves. Any promises we have made to defend anyone else have to be seen as not worth the time it would take to repeat them.
Zafar, taking your points in turn:
P.S. The Iranians couldn’t even sink the barge that they painted to look like (a bad artist’s rendition of) an aircraft carrier.
Did they?
Indeed, and since they were so promptly released it’s likely that they weren’t. Is it possible that a US ship would be there for that purpose?
I bow to your superior knowledge, but frankly I’m surprised. It’s the equivalent of an Iranian ship bumping up into Guam unannounced – would the US really be okay with that?
(I agree Iran violated International Law with that video thing.)
Oh, and their mother wears army boots? Got it.
This is just the latest fishy event in a long line of them. And because conspiracy theories aren’t allowed here, I can’t tell you what all was running through my head yesterday.
Thanks for respecting the CoC. I will say that I’ve noticed that when people aren’t given enough information about an event to form a reasonably cogent appraisal of what happened — and this is a universal tendency I’ve observed in every country — they start to construct conspiracy theories. It seems to be the natural way people’s minds work, including mine. So if many people have a lot of conspiracies about this administration, it suggests, at the least, that their communication strategy is just lousy. It leaves people feeling in the dark and unclear about what they’re doing. And that’s bad for public trust.
Yes. Obama’s veils of secrecy and underhanded tactics make my imagination work overtime.