Releasing the Americans Benefited Others
The Iranian Diplomacy news website discusses the release of two American prisoners in Iran with Mostafa Kavakebian, a member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of Iran's Parliament.
He believes that Iran did not gain any benefit from releasing Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, the American hikers who were arrested two years ago for espionage while hiking along Iran's unmarked border with Iraq. He thinks that sometimes in the diplomatic relations and the foreign policy, countries have to forbear their domestic laws and regulations for the sake of national interests. Therefore, the release of two American prisoners in Iran would diplomatically be justifiable within the framework of national interests. However, the first and foremost issue here is to find out how these national interests are being planned and approached by the government and how the civil rights and demands of Iranian nationals are being considered. A few points should be mentioned here.
First of all, in my opinion, it would have sounded more justifiable and desirable if Iran could release some of the Iranian citizens imprisoned in the U.S. in exchange for these two American prisoners. It’s not clear yet what reasons and interests lie behind the release of Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, especially considering that they were sentenced by Iran’s court to eight years in prison. Their release cannot be interpreted as a type of leave granted by the judiciary. In spite of 5 billion Rial (about US$465,000), it is unlikely that they would ever return to Iran to attend court, as didn't Sarah Shourd, the other American prisoner who was released last year.
Second, the Iranian government should have taken into consideration all aspects and consequences of such a release. Iran should have had them take an oath or make a serious commitment not to poison the atmosphere against the Islamic Republic of Iran after their freedom. However, as it appears, the Iranian authorities did not adopt a comprehensive policy to approach this issue. Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal have already attended a press conference upon their arrival in the United States and in their speech, they spoke against the Islamic Republic of Iran. They pressed serious charges to the judiciary system of Iran, including the existence of torture in prison.
Another point to mention here is that Iran claims to be looking for some higher benefits in releasing the American prisoners. They believe that it may affect the bilateral and international relations between the U.S. and Iran, even though the U.S. keeps talking and advertising against Iran and does not agree on the exchange of the Iranian prisoners in the U.S. However, I wonder if this action would benefit U.S.-Iran relations at all. Neither do I think that it will make the U.S. approach the Islamic Republic of Iran in a more sensible and desirable diplomatic way. So Iran has, indeed, gained nothing in this issue.
The last point to mention here is that a few countries are considered mediators in the recent release of the American prisoners. In the first place, I do not think that their mediation had a definite and strong impact on the whole procedure. Their presence might have been partially effective, but they were by no means the main cause of the release. They are, nevertheless, trying to derive their own benefit from this case. Iran might also think that it has reaped some benefits out of this mediation. But the main point here is that these counties are definitely looking for an opportunity to have a better relation with the U.S. and the West. It sounds like mediation in this case brought them great benefit. Nevertheless, it is not yet obvious what Iran has gained though all this.
He believes that Iran did not gain any benefit from releasing Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, the American hikers who were arrested two years ago for espionage while hiking along Iran's unmarked border with Iraq. He thinks that sometimes in the diplomatic relations and the foreign policy, countries have to forbear their domestic laws and regulations for the sake of national interests. Therefore, the release of two American prisoners in Iran would diplomatically be justifiable within the framework of national interests. However, the first and foremost issue here is to find out how these national interests are being planned and approached by the government and how the civil rights and demands of Iranian nationals are being considered. A few points should be mentioned here.
First of all, in my opinion, it would have sounded more justifiable and desirable if Iran could release some of the Iranian citizens imprisoned in the U.S. in exchange for these two American prisoners. It’s not clear yet what reasons and interests lie behind the release of Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal, especially considering that they were sentenced by Iran’s court to eight years in prison. Their release cannot be interpreted as a type of leave granted by the judiciary. In spite of 5 billion Rial (about US$465,000), it is unlikely that they would ever return to Iran to attend court, as didn't Sarah Shourd, the other American prisoner who was released last year.
Second, the Iranian government should have taken into consideration all aspects and consequences of such a release. Iran should have had them take an oath or make a serious commitment not to poison the atmosphere against the Islamic Republic of Iran after their freedom. However, as it appears, the Iranian authorities did not adopt a comprehensive policy to approach this issue. Shane Bauer and Josh Fattal have already attended a press conference upon their arrival in the United States and in their speech, they spoke against the Islamic Republic of Iran. They pressed serious charges to the judiciary system of Iran, including the existence of torture in prison.
Another point to mention here is that Iran claims to be looking for some higher benefits in releasing the American prisoners. They believe that it may affect the bilateral and international relations between the U.S. and Iran, even though the U.S. keeps talking and advertising against Iran and does not agree on the exchange of the Iranian prisoners in the U.S. However, I wonder if this action would benefit U.S.-Iran relations at all. Neither do I think that it will make the U.S. approach the Islamic Republic of Iran in a more sensible and desirable diplomatic way. So Iran has, indeed, gained nothing in this issue.
The last point to mention here is that a few countries are considered mediators in the recent release of the American prisoners. In the first place, I do not think that their mediation had a definite and strong impact on the whole procedure. Their presence might have been partially effective, but they were by no means the main cause of the release. They are, nevertheless, trying to derive their own benefit from this case. Iran might also think that it has reaped some benefits out of this mediation. But the main point here is that these counties are definitely looking for an opportunity to have a better relation with the U.S. and the West. It sounds like mediation in this case brought them great benefit. Nevertheless, it is not yet obvious what Iran has gained though all this.
Next article![]( "Points of Reference: Crime, Punishment and Politics")
