Iran to prosecute British embassy workers
posted at 8:05 am on July 3, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
The Iranian mullahs have tried to paint the uprising of the last three weeks as the effect of foreign influences on an otherwise happy populace, and now they will put on a show trial to help reinforce that narrative. The regime announced that it will prosecute eight employees of the British embassy for … something, although right now it’s not clear what. Oh, and they’ve already confessed to the charges that on which the regime hasn’t decided, whatever they may be:
A top Iranian cleric said Friday that some of the detained Iranian staffers of the British Embassy in Tehran will be put on trial, and he accused Britain of a role in instigating widespread protests that erupted over the country’s disputed presidential election.
The announcement by Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati came a day after the European Union demanded Iran release the staffers, who were detained on June 27. Britain is pressing EU countries to pull their ambassadors out of Tehran in protest.
Jannati, a powerful hard-liner who is close to Iran’s supreme leader, told worshippers during a Friday prayer sermon in Tehran that the detained staffers “made confessions.”
“In these events, their embassy had a presence,” he said, referring to the post-election turmoil. “Some people were arrested. Well, inevitably, they will be put on trial.”
He did not say how many staffers will be tried or on what charges. Earlier Iranian officials said all but one of the eight embassy personnel arrested on June 27 had been released, but European Union officials said they believed more than one was still being held.
The EU, meanwhile, has been stunned by the speed in which their trading partner has turned on them in the crisis. Since the US has no diplomatic presence in Iran, the mullahs had to find another scapegoat for its blameshifting, although they still managed to prominently mention the CIA. Now that Britain, France, and Germany have all been called evil by the regime, the three nations at the core of the European Union wonder what to do next:
As the war of words between Iran and the West escalates, the European Union is struggling to come up with a way to respond to Tehran’s verbal attacks.
In a particularly fierce broadside Wednesday, Iranian General Hassan Firouzabadi, who is the country’s chief of staff, left no doubts about who Iran’s enemies in the West were. In remarks quoted by the semi-official news agency Fars, he singled out Britain, France and Germany, saying they were hostile to Iran and had offended the Islamic nation. Firouzabadi accused the countries of “interference” in Iran’s post-election unrest. …
According to media reports, the EU is now discussing the possibility of withdrawing all its 27 ambassadors from Tehran. Senior officials from member states were planning to discuss the issue at a meeting in Stockholm Thursday.
“We have to show solidarity and present a united front in the EU,” said Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, whose country took over the EU’s six-month rotating presidency on Wednesday. However one EU diplomat who preferred not to be named told the news agency Reuters that some countries, including Germany and Italy, were skeptical as to whether pulling out the ambassadors would make sense.
Perhaps they should look at it another way: does it make sense to continue doing business with a mullahcracy that has clearly lost its legitimacy with the Iranian people? That’s a better long-term question for the EU. The US has already made the mistake of attempting to prop up Ali Khamenei and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by publicly repeating our desire to negotiate with them, only to have the regime use Obama as a punching bag.
That question has import for the opposition in Iran. One of the triggers of dissatisfaction among Iranians even prior to the election was the international isolation created by the radical mullahs in power. A withdrawal by the EU, even a moderate one, would increase that isolation and create more impetus for dissent.
The trial of embassy workers should be a decision point for the free world. Will they continue to lend legitimacy to a clique ruling Iran by force, or will they isolate the mullahs and force their hand?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
without-precondition.
rob verdi on July 3, 2009 at 8:06 AM
you watch, the EU and others will take some marginal actions just to be on the record as opposed, but business will continue. I would say the Europeans would be supportive of a tougher line by the United States, but that is not going to happen.
rob verdi on July 3, 2009 at 8:08 AM
true that, rob
blatantblue on July 3, 2009 at 8:11 AM
Moreover, we all know the mullahs have a penchant for snatching embassy workers.
Zorro on July 3, 2009 at 8:12 AM
Me thinks,that if Iran is really going to try
the British embassy workers,then isn’t it actually,
an ‘ACT OF WAR’!!
canopfor on July 3, 2009 at 8:13 AM
Confessions of what?
ladyingray on July 3, 2009 at 8:16 AM
It’s not British citizens , it Iranians working on the embassy.
It think EU should withdraw all its ambassadors, appeasement doesn’t work.
the_nile on July 3, 2009 at 8:17 AM
The Euroweenies will do what they always do — take the line of least resistance. If they had the stones to stand up to radical Muslims, they wouldn’t have allowed millions of them to take up residence in their countries.
AZCoyote on July 3, 2009 at 8:18 AM
It’s not British citizens.
the_nile on July 3,2009 at 8:17AM.
the_nile: A minor detail,declare war,just the same!!:)
canopfor on July 3, 2009 at 8:25 AM
Since BHO has shown how much he despises the Brits, he’ll ignore this.
jgapinoy on July 3, 2009 at 8:25 AM
They could do what Hans Brix did, only that would involve getting very angry.
They could send a letter telling the mullahs how hurt their feelings are.
misterpeasea on July 3, 2009 at 8:27 AM
I predict that there will be a conflict for these workers in the near future having to do with collar size and a failed attempt to defy gravity.
The Mullahs and their minions have demonstrated again and again their contempt for dissent both from within and without. One is left to wonder how any rational human being cannot see that plainly.
However, in the new world paradigm, whatever is in the best interest of the United States our so-called president will do the exact opposite con mucho gusto.
Since we absolutely will not stand in the way of Iran achieving their nuclear weapon goal – oh, heck, we’ll probably wind up helping them – we can only hope that Israel still holds on to sanity by a thread and will do what clearly needs to be done. And quickly.
turfmann on July 3, 2009 at 8:30 AM
Follow the money. Doing business with the mullahs is profitable for the EU. There will be a little public squealing for show, then back to the Nokia contracts to aid spying on the protestors to help the regime. Same old, same old.
a capella on July 3, 2009 at 8:42 AM
“We have to show solidarity and present a united front in the EU, said Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt,
LOL. Like herding cats.
albill on July 3, 2009 at 8:46 AM
Usually we can expect W. europe to do nothing tangible. But this time may be different. Their leaders know what Obama is, and what side he’s on.
Newton’s 3rd Law:
For every action, there’s an equal and opposite reaction.
JiangxiDad on July 3, 2009 at 8:52 AM
Shades of Clinton?
Johan Klaus on July 3, 2009 at 8:53 AM
Nahhh.
Let’s see how it plays out./sarc
Saltysam on July 3, 2009 at 8:56 AM
Mustn’t meddle.
itsnotaboutme on July 3, 2009 at 8:58 AM
Europe may also act more forcefully because Obama is likely to privately give away Georgia and Ukraine to Russia when he meets with Putin and Co.on Monday. Europe’s energy supplies are at stake.
JiangxiDad on July 3, 2009 at 8:58 AM
It looks like Iran thinks it was just a hand full of disenfranchised youths trying to hijack a noble
religionIslamic nation.BL@KBIRD on July 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM
This situation should have come to this:
.
Delay tactics are futile with tyrannical regimes.
.
Format the following:
.
Invasion of Iran __ Iraqi style – redo —- United coalition front is assembled —-Inform the greens in Iran of world support for freedom – Desert Shield 2 operations are brought to the middle east — If regime does not acquiesce to the greens demands — Infiltrations of arms and troops are injected to Iranian territory —-> War is initiated to topple the Iranian regime —- nuclear threat eliminated/neutralized —- Democratic Republic government installed.
.
.
Tyrants only respond to a show of strength thru actions. Words alone will not suffice. Sad realization but there is our reality.
.
Obama this is your plan “B.” Get to it, the world is watching you Obama!
Americannodash on July 3, 2009 at 9:00 AM
They are obviously feeling left out.
Saltysam on July 3, 2009 at 9:01 AM
More like shades of the original Mr. Peanut, Jimmy Carter, seeing that he is responsible for the mullahs being in power today.
Rod on July 3, 2009 at 9:03 AM
These embassy workers are all local Iranian citizens, correct? I mean they’re allowed by Iran to work inside western embassies. This is all a big farce anyway. They’re prob. all iranian spies, or clerical nobodies. Ignore it.
JiangxiDad on July 3, 2009 at 9:07 AM
Shades of Clinton? Johan Klaus on July 3, 2009 at 8:53 AM
Indeed. Ironically, it seems to be Hillary that is trying to steer our so-called president to do the right thing. Far too little, far too late. It is as though our so-called president is siding with the Mullahs instead of those yearning to be free.
Am I the only one who would have been far more comfortable with HRC as COC than what we now have, then pinches himself to make sure its all not a bad dream?
turfmann on July 3, 2009 at 9:08 AM
I would swap two Clinton’s for one Obama any day. We survived 8 full years of them. Right now, I don’t think we’ll make it another 6 months.
Rod on July 3, 2009 at 9:16 AM
where are the ghosts of Winston churchill & margaret thatcher?
kelley in virginia on July 3, 2009 at 9:17 AM
America, F*ck yeah!
Monica on July 3, 2009 at 9:21 AM
So, this is what happens when a country continues diplomatic relations and trade with a hostile country.
myrenovations on July 3, 2009 at 9:30 AM
Europe, despite any chest thumping, will continue to do what it has always done–feed the beast with the hope of being eaten last.
Europe has rarely been forceful in any situation as regards tyranny. It is not a stretch to suggest that many of the world’s festering problems are a direct result of their actions.
patrick neid on July 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Jeff from WI on July 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Talking to Hillary or Nancy Reagan
Jeff from WI on July 3, 2009 at 9:36 AM
I would love to know what happened to the injured who sought help in the embassies when it was apparent the regime was stalking the hospitals.
For me all of the current situations are two times as troubling. Unrest anywhere always has the potential to spill over to the rest of the world but we have a president who seems to be on the wrong side of each argument. It’s discouraging when there is not a single issue on which you can agree with the president.
Cindy Munford on July 3, 2009 at 9:40 AM
When will Obama and his Dem loons have his Bush show trial?
Haven’t heard much talk of that lately.
JellyToast on July 3, 2009 at 9:46 AM
If the EU caves on this hostage taking, this crime will happen again in Iran or elsewhere. And if Obama opens talks with the Iran regime while it is holding British hostages, he will be aiding and abetting this crime.
Loxodonta on July 3, 2009 at 9:56 AM
I want to know about this as well. I’ve searched the news and haven’t found an answer to this question.
Yes. Except worse than discouraging. Very scary.
Loxodonta on July 3, 2009 at 10:05 AM
I thing “hostages” is a misnomer. These are “foreign” embassy workers ie. Iranian citizens, not British as far as I know.
JiangxiDad on July 3, 2009 at 10:12 AM
How in the world does Mr. Obama even entertain the idea of talking with the government of Iran? Any interaction he has with these people is tantamount to if not agreeing, condoning, their behavior. It will confirm that he is the weak sister that people suspect.
Cindy Munford on July 3, 2009 at 10:16 AM
I don’t see it as weakness, necessarily. I think Obama is trying to send every signal possible to the world’s rogues, dictators and thugs that he can work with them, and that they should feel comfortable with him.
It will take them a little while to find a new enemy (Great Britain will do for now) to substitute for their usual tactic of blaming it all on the US, but very soon they will get used to the new dynamic, and you will see Obama welcomed into their club.
Predictions: Russia will get US OK to re-take Georgia and Ukraine. Iran will get bomb, and US pressure on Israel. China will get no blowback re. Taiwan issues, Chavez will get to export his leftist rev. to vulnerable c.American and S. American countries–all with the US wink and nod.
Obama is the enemy folks. Expect him to act accordingly.
JiangxiDad on July 3, 2009 at 10:32 AM
I think we have to wait and see how this plays out.
No, I am not quoting Gibbs on Iran’s protests, rather, I am thinking that Iran’s so called leaders would be idiots to proceed by prosecuting embassy workers. If they piss off the EU, with whom Iran has been buying time with in order finish their nuclear missile program, when it is so close to completion, would be more than foolish, and many of those in power over there must know that.
No… I think they are going to let the embassy workers go without explanation or apology.
Danzo on July 3, 2009 at 10:38 AM
The EU needs to take the lead. BHO will be forced to participate (in a meaningful way) or find himself more irrelevant on the world stage. How ironic would it be for the French and Germans to fill the world leadership vacuum and be the champions of freedom.
diogenes on July 3, 2009 at 11:19 AM
The correct move here is almost painfully obvious, just as it was for President Obama. However, I suspect, just like The President, the EU will get it wrong.
BadgerHawk on July 3, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Europe has rarely been forceful in any situation as regards tyranny. It is not a stretch to suggest that many of the world’s festering problems are a direct result of their actions.
patrick neid on July 3, 2009 at 9:35 AM
Here in the U.K we have just heard that two more soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan .
I will pass on your regards to their families.
mags on July 3, 2009 at 11:35 AM
No ghost for Mrs Margaret Thatcher yet. She isn’t really kicking-ass these days (almost 84 years old and just had surgery for a broken arm), but she is still in the world of the living.
YiZhangZhe on July 3, 2009 at 1:53 PM
Turn Iran into a glass parking lot.
BowHuntingTexas on July 3, 2009 at 2:16 PM
“Perhaps they should look at it another way: does it make sense to continue doing business with a mullahcracy that has clearly lost its legitimacy with the Iranian people.”
That is not, in fact, clear. It has lost legitimacy with a large, visible block of Iranians, but no one — including our own CIA, alas — is in a position to guage on the extent or the depth of dissatisfaction. It seems risibly apparent that there’s no way that Ahmadinejad took 2/3’s of the vote across the board. It is not at all sure, however, that Moussavi would actually have won election himself, rather than lost by a much smaller margin. It also remains to be seen whether the majority of Iranians see the crackdown as unwarranted.
The idea that “the international isolation created by the radical mullahs in power” played a significant part in shaping the current unrest is more western fantasy than fact. While reformers obviously preferred a change in tone from Ahmadinejad’s belligerence, the opposition’s shift in focus to the regime itself derived largely from the intransigence and violence of its response — making the reform movement doubly dangerous from the regime’s perspective, of course. Do not underestimate the effectiveness of the information blackout and of official propaganda which may seem absurd to outsiders, but which builds on existing conventional wisdom.
I am solidly in the opposition camp, but I think you’ve grown increasingly quick to opine on the basis of a very superficial analysis both here and elsewhere. In this case, you barely touch the complex of forces at play both within Iran, and between Iran, the EU, and other international players from Russian and China to Latin America. The question you pose is not a better question, it is a feel-good, mostly substance-free question. While Obama’s abandonment of support for dissidents and democratic reform is disgraceful and myopic, we will have to deal with Iran, one way or another. If you look at carefully at the unintended consequences of sanctions, you find that not only do many international entities see them as business opportunities, economic isolation tends to consolidate authoritarian power and popular dependence, not the reverse.
JM Hanes on July 3, 2009 at 2:27 PM
Comment pages: