A premeditated heist

When fifteen British sailors were taken prisoner by Iran, geopolitical analyst Rosie O'Donnell compared it to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. She may have a point: just as the Johnson Administration exaggerated, falsified and/or manipulated the Tonkin incident, it looks like the Iranians exaggerated, falsified and/or manipulated this one. (What do you mean, "that's not what she meant"?)

Dominic Kennedy, in The Times, suggests it was all planned well in advance:

The Ministry of Defence released the coordinates of the searched vessel yesterday to prove that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards made an unprovoked and improper attack in Iraqi waters.

The Iranians also blundered in diplomatic talks by giving the British their own compass reference for the place where they said the 14 men and one woman had been seized. When Britain plotted these on a map and pointed out that the spot was in Iraq’s maritime area, the Iranians came up with a new set of coordinates, putting the seizure in their own waters.

The speed and cunning shown by the Revolutionary Guards has raised suspicions that their action was premeditated. A senior military officer described it as “deliberate”.

It took only three minutes for the Iranians, moving at 40 knots, to move from their legitimate positions monitoring shipping in their waters to come alongside the British last Friday morning.

Why didn't the British fight back? Kennedy says they would have had every right to do so, in self-defence, but it would have been suicidal:

— The two Iranian patrol ships that seized the Britons were equipped with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns, enough for a small sea battle. By contrast, the Britons go lightly armed on vessels they search in the Gulf. Each man is issued with a rifle or a pistol

— The Iranians struck at a vulnerable moment when the Britons were climbing down a ladder to jump into their inflatables

— The Royal Navy does train its men in the techniques needed to fight at just such a dangerous stage. “They had all the rights available to act in self-defence under law,” a senior military officer said. But they were in an “almost impossible position”

— A similar decision to hold fire was taken by the six Royal Marines and two sailors captured by Iran in 2004 in similar circumstances. Scott Fallon, a former marine, said they did think about shooting their way free but knew it would be hopeless. He told BBC Radio 4: “They had antiaircraft guns. We would have stood no chance”

Meanwhile, the Iranians say they may not release Faye Tunney after all, as long as the British refuse to act like proper dhimmis:

British sailor Faye Turney may be set free by Iran on Thursday, but there is word her release could be delayed if Iran is faced with "fuss and wrong behaviour" from Britain.

[...]

Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said on state television that Turney's release would depend on the British response.

"We even said that the grounds were ready for the release of a woman among the British sailors but if we are faced with a fuss and wrong behaviour then this would be suspended and it would not take place," Larijani said, according to Reuters news service.

In another interview on Iranian radio, Larijani said specifically that Turney's release could be delayed if Britain takes the issue to the UN Security Council or freezes relations, as it has threatened to do.

Damian P.

Posted by damian at March 29, 2007 12:35 PM