Iran: British sailors to be used as bargaining chips

jp ^ | 3/24/07 | jp

[Flavius]

Fifteen British sailors taken at gunpoint Friday by Iranian Revolutionary Guard and Al Quds soldiers were captured intentionally and are to be used as bargaining chips to be used for the release of five Iranians who were arrested at the Iranian consul in Irbil, Iraq by US troops, an Iranian official told the daily paper Asharq al-Awsat on Saturday.

In addition, a senior Iranian military official said Saturday that the decision to capture the soldiers was made during a March 18 emergency meeting of the High Council for Security following a report by the Al-Quds contingent commander, Kassem Suleimani, to the Iranian chief of the armed forces, Maj.Gen. Hassan Firouz Abadi. In the report, according to Asharq al-Awsat, Suleimani warned Abadi that Al Quds and Revolutionary Guards' operations had become transparent to US and British intelligence following the arrest of a senior Al Quds officer and four of his deputies in Irbil.

According to the official, Iran was worried that its detained people would leak sensitive intelligence information.

# Analysis: Who knows who the waters belong to? # Teheran embassies prepare escape plans

Iran's semi-official news agency, Fars, reported that the 15 Britons have been transferred to the capital Teheran "to explain their aggressive action." There was no immediate official confirmation of the move.

The agency said the 15 included "some women." In Britain, officials told the Press Association news agency that at least one woman was among the group.

Navigational equipment on the seized British boats "show that they (sailors) were aware that they were operating in Iranian waters and Iranian border gurads fulfilled their responsibility," Fars quoted an unidentified official as saying.

Meanwhile, officials from Western countries expressed concern Saturday that Iran would engage in similar acts in the future in order to discourage the United Nation's Security Council from imposing further sanctions, reported Army Radio.

Iran had maintained Friday that the British sailors had entered Iranian territorial waters illegally; the United States Naval Forces Central Command (US Fifth Fleet) issued the following statement regarding the incident:

"At approximately 10:30 a.m. Iraqi time March 23, 15 British naval personnel, engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters in support of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1723 and the government of Iraq, were seized by Iranian naval vessels.

The boarding party had completed a successful inspection of a merchant ship when they andtheir two boats were surrounded and escorted by Iranian vessels into Iranian territorial waters.

The British government is pursuing this matter with the Iranian authorities at the highest level and on the instructions of the British Foreign Secretary, the Iranian ambassador was summoned to the British Foreign Office. The British Government is demanding the immediate, unconditional and safe return of their people and equipment.

Royal Navy forces operate as part of Combined Task Force 158. CTF 158's mission is to maintain security and stability in Iraqi territorial waters and to protect the Iraqi oil terminals, under the UN mandate set out in the Security Council Resolutions on Iraq.

CTF 158 is currently commanded by Royal Navy Commodore Nick Lambert and operates as one of three coalition task forces in the Combined Maritime Forces under the leadership of Commander, US Naval Forces Central Command/US Fifth Fleet, Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff," the statement concluded.

Iranian state television said, however, that this was "not the first time that British military personnel during the occupation of Iraq have entered illegally into Iran's territorial waters," the state TV quoted a foreign ministry official as saying. He was not identified by name.

Earlier, the British government summoned the Iranian ambassador, Rasoul Movahedian, to the Foreign Office for a meeting, which a department spokesman described as "brisk but cordial."

During the meeting, Sir Peter Ricketts, the senior civil servant in the department, demanded "the safe return of our personnel and equipment," the spokesman said, speaking on condition of anonymity under department rules.

Britain's Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett demanded Teheran fully explain the detention, saying in a statement after Movahedian's summons that he "was left in no doubt that we want them back."

Iran later claimed that the British soldiers and marines have been "detained by Iran's border authorities for further investigation ... of the blatant aggression into Iranian territorial waters," the official also said.

Iran demanded an immediate explanation from London and "asked that this not happen again," the television said.

The foreign ministry conveyed Iran's "strong protest" to the diplomat, who was said to be the British charge d'affaires in the absence of a London ambassador to Teheran. The diplomat was also asked to "provide answer as soon as possible" from London.

[Chuck Dent]

it seems that the UK is even in a more desperate situation that the US.

Germany, France & the UK lost millions of their warrior breeding stock in WWI, from which they have never recovered. Today's occupants of those regions are the offspring of weaklings & cowards.

It's hard to imagine that it was only 90 years ago that French military policy was based on the principle of fierce counter-attack; a strategy that resulted in hundreds of thousands of soldiers killed during major battles.

Both the British & French would summarily execute anyone who didn't charge or attempted to retreat. The French actually employed 'decimation' - the random process of executing every 10th person of a platoon, etc for failing to retake positions.

The Iranians & other 3rd world muzzies are simply taking advantage of a European civilization that committed mass suicide.

[HitmanLV]

Let's see how the Brits and the World reacts to this act of war

Do you really have to wonder. I suspect Blair called them up right away to apologize for this misunderstanding, and Dubya was listening in on conference call nodding vigorously. :-)

[GregoryFul]

Fierce, you bet. How much fierceness do you think it will take to survive, thrive as we have been doing the last 50 years, in a world of diminishing natural resources, and increasing demand from the myriad marginal civilizations that have so far lost the race? We need Spartans in leadership positions, not things like Nancy.

[supremedoctrine]

This seems tailor-made to exacerbate the already sour relations between UK and US over the Iraq War. It may backfire though. My first thought was ,
"Oh, if only Carter were President now", then my sense of irony got the better of me as I time-travelled nearly 30 years back into the present. Interesting scenario though--another "hostage" situation which could conceivably result in a stalemate to be settled only by new faces in high places in the UK and the US???I imagine there WILL be an exchange, UNLESS they can be convinced that it makes no sense to punish British soldiers for what you think of as American guilt/ So what is the political math going on here, anyway? AMERICAN authorities are supposed to release Iranian operatives/captured prisoners, in EXCHANGE for British sailors? I guess that's it. What more perfect way of creating MORE dissension and bad feeling, if we hesitate in doing it?

[supremedoctrine]

That is actually a wonderful idea---strategic bombing of a sort that would help inspire an attempted coup by those in Iran, and they are legion , who are about as fed up with Ahmanutjob, and the Mullahs DEFINING Iran's place in the world as we are. This act by the Iranian "leader" is ONLY meant to provoke and bring things to a head. Before we bomb we should tell them and the world WHY we are bombing, AND what we hope to accomplish by it. THIS KIND OF THING CANNOT GO ON INDEFINITELY, and it will if Ahmanutjob and Chavez,and any wannabes who think they are global players in a New World Order of their own making having anything to say about it.

[CatoRenasci]

It's hard to imagine that it was only 90 years ago that French military policy was based on the principle of fierce counter-attack; a strategy that resulted in hundreds of thousands of soldiers killed during major battles.

It was worse than that - it was all the spirit of the attack, in which superior French elan would carry the day.

The froggies even disdained the pre-WWI European trend to uniforms that blended into the terrain (British Khaki, German Field Grey) in favor of retaining their blue coats and red trousers. A French minister of war, shortly before the outbreak of WWI, when it was suggested the French adopt a less conspicuous uniform, is said to have replied in indignation: le pantaloons rouge c'est la France! [the red trousers are France!] The wisdom of this was demonstrated in 1914 as poiliu by the tens of thousands were slaughtered attacking German positions held by over-aged reservists.

[txrangerette]

Write fiction for a living. You do it so well.

[fish hawk]

We need to solve this in an Islamic way: Tell them what ever they want to hear, get the soldiers back and then bomb the living crap out of their country. Mainly the known nuke places and military bases etc. Wipe out their total air force in one day like Israel did during their war. Now, we can sit down and talk terms.

[Let's Roll]

That was a given - guess putting it into a statement is for the American Idol fans and "Arab Street".

Arab streeters anyway, doubt Idol fans have or will even notice this development.

[Pub Linkser--80]

That's ridiculous. Bush & Blair are both very tough men. They did not back down from an invasion of Iraq when Saddam was making quiet but steady progress towards nuclear weapons for his regime.

This kidnapping by Iran strikes me as an act of desperation that wasn't fully deliberated in advance. The Iranians just shot themselves in the foot.

[Pub Linkser--80]

I think this is a mistake by Iran, and Nutjob just shot himself in the foot. This will only strengthen British public opinion in support of a strong stand against Iranian nuclear weapons. This looks like a desperate, emotional outburst by the Iranians as they see the entire rest of the world closing in on them and breaking down the IRGC and Iran's intelligence system. A number of top IRGC officers have defected or been captured lately and Nutjob knows (at least at a subconscious level) that's he's in trouble here.

Bloggers underestimate the power of the Western world and Russia in this nuclear standoff, simply because the West has only used a small amount of its combined power to run covert operations and apply financial and diplomatic pressure to Iran. We're steadily increasing the amount of such force that we're applying to Iran, until the Iranian regime finally cracks. Pop some popcorn and stay tuned; this will be quite a show before it's over. This one will be a hit on the History Channel in 25 years.

[Pub Linkser--80]

Here's an example of pressure the West can and will apply before long: What do you think the Iranian regime will do when the rest of the world stop selling oilfield equipment to Iran, and that means everybody including France and Russia? Without spare parts and replcement equipment, Iran's oil production and national income will rapidly collapse and the regime will give up on uranium enrichment in exchange for oilfield equipment. We don't need to bomb them, we just have to stop selling them oilfield equipment, and I beleive that is not far off from happening.

I don't know this for sure, but I would bet that the Western-leaning Gulf states such as Saudi, Kuwait, and the UAE, have already expanded production capacity to make up for a complete loss of Iranian oil production. Let's just say that Nutjob could not buy life insurance next week anywhere at any price.

[Gritty]

What do you think the Iranian regime will do when the rest of the world stop selling oilfield equipment to Iran, and that means everybody including France and Russia?

France? Maybe. Russia? Yes, but cash only.

[Ryle]

This one?

(sorry, don't know how to post the image, or even if it's permitted)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_empire_strikes_back_newsweek.jpg

[MinorityRepublican]

I may be sexist but it's a bad idea to have a woman "demanding" something back to a Muslim.

[HitmanLV]

We'll see how tough the Killer Bees (Bush & Blair) get with Iran. My guess is: not at all.

[HitmanLV]

Wait and see.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Dang right it is!!!!

[RightWhale]

George Washington wouldn't have allowed his patrol to be captured. So it starts a world war, so what. Go down fighting whether you make it or not.

[Dahoser]

Yes! Thanks!