Posted on 10/09/2001 6:07:30 PM PDT by AfghanJohn
Kabul aid workers 'scared'
BBC News
Tuesday, 9 October, 2001, 13:34 GMT 14:34 UK
The lawyer representing eight foreign aid workers on trial in Afghanistan says they are safe, but scared.
The workers are being held in the Afghan capital, Kabul, which has been one of the targets in the US-led raids on Afghanistan.
On the eve of Sunday's bombardment of Afghan targets, the Taleban authorities offered to release the aid workers if the US stopped threatening military strikes.
The foreigners could face the death penalty if found guilty of trying to spread Christianity. Physically 'alright' "I did speak to Kabul and I was assured that they are safe, that they are physically alright, although they are scared by what has happened," lawyer Atif Ali Khan told Reuters news agency in Peshawar, Pakistan.
Mr Khan, a Pakistani national, said he was trying to get a visa to return to Kabul to defend the aid workers.
But he said the visa was dependent on how long the attacks on Afghanistan lasted. The trial was disrupted by the 11 September attacks on the United States, when diplomats and relatives of the workers left Afghanistan.
The aid workers - four Germans, two Americans and two Australians - were detained on 5 August.
They deny the charges against them.
The Taleban closed down the operations of their charity, Shelter Now International, and produced as evidence bibles and cassettes to support their claim that the foreigners were trying to convert Afghans to Christianity.
They are the only foreign aid workers left inside Taleban-controlled Afghanistan.
Mr Khan told Reuters they were feeling the strain of their isolation.
"There is pressure building on them, they are the only foreigners in the city," he said.
The whereabouts of 16 Afghan aid workers who were arrested with them is unknown.
While I hope they survive, the fact remains that they voluntarily went into a country that they knew was extremely dangerous. They were aware of the risks, and they may end up suffering the consequences. Perhaps their families can find some mercenaries who would undertake the task of trying to rescue them, but they are not worth risking the lives of any of our U.S. military personnel.
Just what type of AMERICAN IS worth the risking of the lives of our military people?
Disagree, and I think most of our military would too. If it is logistically possible, a plan is probably already in motion. But hostage rescue requires good intel. Not too sure how good ours is in this situation. Second, getting in and out of an urban environment covertly is one of the hardest operations to pull off. Thirdly, it depends on the threat. If they are not yet threatened with physical violence, we may be waiting to see how things play out on their own before risking a raid.
And would you have advocated that the firemen and police officers trapped in the WTC, who after all were volunteers and "knew the risks," should have called their families and HIRED people to try to rescue them?
What would you say if the criminal Taliban were holding US diplomats from our Kabul offices (we had no embassy)? They were, of course, volunteers, who knew it was dangerous--so would we totally blow them off also?
How about POWs, if any are taken? Are they "worth" the life of any of our soldiers?
These aid workers were spreading American good will as much as could be done there, and their work may well have had some positive influence. Surely you are not saying that only those American citizens whose mission is directed by a central command instead of by personal conviction and courage are worthy of US protection.
That said, although a special rescue attempt may not be possible or even necesary, if we attack Kabul on the ground I am confident that our leadership is honorable and will not foresake these people, and that their rescue would be a part of that operation.
And we are praying regularly for their peace and protection.
What would you say if the criminal Taliban were holding US diplomats from our Kabul offices (we had no embassy)? They were, of course, volunteers, who knew it was dangerous--so would we totally blow them off also?
How about POWs, if any are taken? Are they "worth" the life of any of our soldiers?
All of the above would be worth risking the lives of our soldiers. Diplomats and POWs and police and firefighters were doing their jobs (sometimes very dangerous jobs) and have a reasonable expectation that the rest of us will do whatever we can to back them up, including employing the use of military force to act against terrorists and their hosts.
But individual American citizens cannot similarly expect that we will come to their rescue anywhere in the world that they may choose to insert themselves. Otherwise we would be at the mercy of any individual who for whatever reason got in a jam and thereby precipitated an international crisis. We have to look at the specific circumstances. There may be good reasons for acting to protect American citizens in other countries, especially if the problem was absolutely none of their doing.
For example, if terrorists started kidnapping random Americans off the streets of Paris or London or some other normally safe country, and then spirited them to Kabul to use as hostages, that would definitely be a situation that would deserve U.S. military action and attempted rescue. Conversely, if a team of American mercenaries infiltrated Iraq to try to assassinate Sadam Hussein and were captured, that would definitely not be a situation that would deserve U.S. military action and attempted rescue.
I agree. And I was in Afghanistan fully aware of this situation and the risk I was taking. I am the one who decided to go there when the U.S. State Department warned citizens not to go there.
We stopped threatenting military strikes three days ago.
I don't know if these people can be shown to be responsible for their own fate or not. I think in this particular case things spooled out of control in ways that they (the hostages) didn't reasonably expect. I would agree with you that there are times when people take risks and shouldn't be able to just call in the cavalry to bail them out. I'm not sure this is one of those times. I think it would be good to go get them if we can.
It may well be moot, however, for reasons that others have noted above. Hostage extraction requires a very large number of impossible things to happen right on time. It's simething of an imponderable, given our limited information, whether it could be done in this case.
Yeesh. [trundling off for more coffee]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.