Conduct Unbecoming
Well, whatever did happen to name, rank and number? Under the Geneva Convention that is all a member of a country's military captured during times of combat is expected to deliver. In the case of the 15 British military seamen absconded by the Iranian Republican Guard this is most definitely not what occurred. When the decision was made in Tehran to stage this abduction in the very best tradition of international behaviour unbecoming any country proud of being a respected part of the world community, they were no doubt uncertain what their own next step would be, beyond bellicose accusations and issuing threats to young and inexperienced military personnel in their temporary keep.
One imagines they felt triumphant at their successful coup and nervous at the very same time about the uncertain outcome of their audacious little adventure on the high seas. In the end, although they certainly gained their share of scorn by other nations, as much for their silly bombast as for the deed at hand, they doubtless feel they came off pretty well. Their bullying was, after all, highly successful. They completely cowed the young marines and sailors into attitudes of abject apology in response to their self-acknowledged violations of Iranian territorial waters.
Are we to assume that the her Royal Majesty's Royal Navy has become so lax, so degraded in their protocol that they not only failed to properly ascertain that their personnel, engaged in UN-sanctioned inspections were in full sight and protection at all times to avoid just such an event, one that had already occurred years earlier and for which a recurrence could be found to be an inexcusable lapse of due diligence? That discipline and the need to properly train personnel was at such a low ebb that personnel had not received the training they would require to enable them to behave in a manner becoming their nation's proud and able military representatives?
Are recruits into the Royal Navy so insecure, shallow and self-absorbed that they are considered to be untrainable, and better let them get on, on their own recognizance, any which way that circumstances led them to? "Throughout our ordeal", said Lieutenant Felix Carman, their spokesperson at a press conference at a military base in England, "we faced constant psychological pressure". Well yes, they would. They were not, after all, playing cops and robbers in a back alley of Liverpool.
Threats and carrots were employed by their Iranian interrogators to convince these prisoners that their situation would seem infinitely more appealing if they were to admit that their country's presence was a deliberate trespass into Iranian waters. And so they relinquished the truth to expediency. Were they ever taught otherwise, that to give their name, rank and number in response would be sufficient, in such troubling situations, should they ever arise? Well, admissions of guilt were forthcoming, handily enabling Tehran to see her way through to a magnanimous gesture, urged on by the more moderate among their ruling elites.
That's swell, that means everyone is happy. Iran is thrilled to have got these nuisances off their hands, having, they feel, made their point, and the hostages are content to be sent back home into the welcoming arms of their worried, but now happy families. And Britain? She grins and bears it, and bears also the news of fresh new deaths of her service people abroad. Britain also has a new appreciation of just who her trustworthy friends are, given this fresh new experience.
Do the young hostages have anything to answer for? Their initial inhibitions about how their submission to fear and uncertainty would be received appears to have been appeased by their enthusiastic welcome home. Forgotten are their effusive thanks and gratefulness for 'forgiveness' of their trespass, given with a sincere smile to President Ahmadinejad. Forgotten are the suggestions that their country's troops need not be abroad where 'they don't belong' by members of those very troops so proudly representing their country abroad.
And their subsequent behaviour? Let's be practical, after all. Wouldn't it be just damn silly to overlook the serendipitous opportunity to earn big money by 'selling' their spectacular story?
One imagines they felt triumphant at their successful coup and nervous at the very same time about the uncertain outcome of their audacious little adventure on the high seas. In the end, although they certainly gained their share of scorn by other nations, as much for their silly bombast as for the deed at hand, they doubtless feel they came off pretty well. Their bullying was, after all, highly successful. They completely cowed the young marines and sailors into attitudes of abject apology in response to their self-acknowledged violations of Iranian territorial waters.
Are we to assume that the her Royal Majesty's Royal Navy has become so lax, so degraded in their protocol that they not only failed to properly ascertain that their personnel, engaged in UN-sanctioned inspections were in full sight and protection at all times to avoid just such an event, one that had already occurred years earlier and for which a recurrence could be found to be an inexcusable lapse of due diligence? That discipline and the need to properly train personnel was at such a low ebb that personnel had not received the training they would require to enable them to behave in a manner becoming their nation's proud and able military representatives?
Are recruits into the Royal Navy so insecure, shallow and self-absorbed that they are considered to be untrainable, and better let them get on, on their own recognizance, any which way that circumstances led them to? "Throughout our ordeal", said Lieutenant Felix Carman, their spokesperson at a press conference at a military base in England, "we faced constant psychological pressure". Well yes, they would. They were not, after all, playing cops and robbers in a back alley of Liverpool.
Threats and carrots were employed by their Iranian interrogators to convince these prisoners that their situation would seem infinitely more appealing if they were to admit that their country's presence was a deliberate trespass into Iranian waters. And so they relinquished the truth to expediency. Were they ever taught otherwise, that to give their name, rank and number in response would be sufficient, in such troubling situations, should they ever arise? Well, admissions of guilt were forthcoming, handily enabling Tehran to see her way through to a magnanimous gesture, urged on by the more moderate among their ruling elites.
That's swell, that means everyone is happy. Iran is thrilled to have got these nuisances off their hands, having, they feel, made their point, and the hostages are content to be sent back home into the welcoming arms of their worried, but now happy families. And Britain? She grins and bears it, and bears also the news of fresh new deaths of her service people abroad. Britain also has a new appreciation of just who her trustworthy friends are, given this fresh new experience.
Do the young hostages have anything to answer for? Their initial inhibitions about how their submission to fear and uncertainty would be received appears to have been appeased by their enthusiastic welcome home. Forgotten are their effusive thanks and gratefulness for 'forgiveness' of their trespass, given with a sincere smile to President Ahmadinejad. Forgotten are the suggestions that their country's troops need not be abroad where 'they don't belong' by members of those very troops so proudly representing their country abroad.
And their subsequent behaviour? Let's be practical, after all. Wouldn't it be just damn silly to overlook the serendipitous opportunity to earn big money by 'selling' their spectacular story?
Labels: Heros and Villains
posted by Pieface | 4:54 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home