Iran Takes More Hostages: What Did the US Expect?
Iran Takes More Hostages: What Did the US Expect?
By Majid Rafizadeh, Gatestone Institute, October 27 2016
One of the American hostages that Iran this year released in exchange for $1.7 billion in cash was Jason Rezaian, who according to his family, has been working to improve the Islamic Republic's image to the world. Rezaian is pictured above with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on January 28, 2016. (Image source: U.S. State Department)
Iran is not only detaining and arresting more Iranian-Americans, but also boasting about it and publicly asking for more money to release them.
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) pointed out recently: "We should wait and see, the U.S. will offer ... many billions of dollars to release" two particular Iranian-American businessman, Siamak Namazi and his father Baquer Namazi.
According to Alex Shirazi's nuanced profile , Siamak Namazi was one of the intellectual architects of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has been accused of lobbying for the Iranian regime and pursuing policies that benefit themselves and the Iranian regime. Accordingly, the organization was founded "as a way to continuously lobby for the removal of sanctions against Iran and to promote Iran's foreign policy, while combating the pro-Israel sentiment in America, according to documents from a Cyprus convention that featured the two men."
Mr. Namazi worked for Iran's Ministry of Housing and Urban Planning from 1994 to 1996. He also joined a company in Tehran called Atieh Bahar Consulting (AB), which was founded by Pari Namazi and her husband, Bijan Khajehpour.
The Tehran-based Atieh Bahar Consulting " offered a range of legal and industrial services to foreign enterprises, most importantly the access it provided to the [Iranian] regime, and the advice it dispensed on how best to navigate the vagaries of the regime's entrenched factions and competitive interests."
In addition, Siamak Namazi seemed to advocate doing business with the Iranian regime, as he pointed out to Lebanon's Daily Star newspaper: "If oil companies want to operate in the Iranian market they need to link up with a local partner, and this is where we step in and help them to find the right partner." This apparently occurred at a time that there were US economic sanctions imposed on Iran, including sanctions on firms dealing with the Iranian government. Baquer Namazi was governor of Iran's Khuzestan province one of the most oil-rich areas in the nation.
Earlier this year, the Obama administration paid nearly $1.7 billion in cash to make sure that Iran would release four Iranian-Americans who were taken as hostages. According to one report , "Future payments to Iran could reach as much as $2 billion, according to sources familiar with the matter."
One of the hostages was Jason Rezaian, who according to his family, has been trying to improve the Islamic Republic's image to the world through his work. Improving Iran's image would undoubtedly benefit the Islamic Republic's political establishment and the ruling politicians of Iran in many ways such as re-entering the international community, enhancing its global legitimacy, re-engaging in the world financial system, improving business opportunities, and bringing more revenues which would empower the IRGC, the hardliners, and the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
One major question that many would then ask is: why the Iranian government would arrest Iranian-Americans who seem to be benefiting the Iranian government's interests, enhancing Iran's legitimacy, doing business, making money for themselves, making money for the Iranian government, or supporting an Iranian lobby group? Is this all part of a tactical game to extort more money from the US, as some might argue?
Other questions raised are that while the State Department has long warned American citizens against traveling to Iran, why do some dual nationals, primarily Iranian-Americans, continue to travel to Iran for business or other reasons? Does not this place the US in a grave situation where it has to plead with Iranian leaders and pay money, while the Iranian government gains the upper hand and enjoys more leverage against Washington?
There are several other issues at stakes as well. First of all, from the IRGC and Khamenei's perspective, while some dual nationals, Iranian-Americans, might appear to be advocating for the Iranian government and advancing Iran and their own interests, the IRGC still can play the tactical game that these individuals are siding with specific Iranian leaders such as Iran's President Hassan Rouhani and Iran's foreign minister Javad Zarif, rather than siding with other Iranian leaders.
Secondly, and more fundamentally, the Iranian government has learned that arresting dual nationals and Iranian-Americans not only can lead to the flow of billions of dollars to Iran, but also can ratchet up Iran's political leverage against the US and Western allies.
Finally, U.S. President Barack Obama appears to have forgotten the basic rule of foreign policy and international law, that a state should not engage in negotiation or paying ransom to other state or non-state actors listed as top sponsors of terrorism or as terrorist organizations.
Paying ransom only reinforces their behavior. The State Department's own report in 2016 found Iran to be still the "top state sponsor of terrorism." Iranian-Americans who travel to Iran despite the warnings put the US in a difficult situation. President Obama is dangerously encouraging the Iranian leaders' detaining and arresting dual nationals to extort money and play hardball.
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, political scientist and Harvard University scholar is president of the International American Council on the Middle East.
Tags
Who is online
433 visitors
"The State Department's own report in 2016 found Iran to be still the "top state sponsor of terrorism.""
I've discovered that not a lot of people give a shit about that.
Obama has enabled the Iranian terrorist regime. Any US citizen traveling to that hell hole should understand he's on his own they have been warned.
With respect to retaliation, we should freeze all assets and reset sanctions.
Another Obama "success".
You would have thought that we would have learned something from the Barbary Wars. Don't pay ransoms!!
You would have thought that we would have learned something from the Barbary Wars. Don't pay ransoms!!
When did we pay ransom? You know better than that.
When did we pay ransom? You know better than that.
What do you think all that cash was sent to the Iranians for, a Ramadan present? Start thinking like a grown up John instead of blindly following the talking points of the perennial children who are in office at present.
We did pay ransom for hostages prior to 1800. It was paid to those in the same area (Middle East) where it was paid this year. Then, when we stopped paying, those in Tripoli took more hostages to force our hands. President Jefferson then issued a famous statement "Millions for defense, not one penny for tribute". Shortly after that, in spite of a rough beginning, U. S. Navy vessels, among them the USS Constitution, began bombarding Tripoli. They continued doing so until the city was in ruins and the hostages were released. It was a long time until anyone in the Middle East tried that kind of nonsense again.
I have never heard of anyone being paid ransom with their own money. We must be good.
Re: The movie The Wind and the Lion-- they did the same thing under Teddy Roosevelt-- and it made a great movie. How historically accurate was it? Probably not very, but there was a problem there in the early 1900s... Tripoly and the Barbary Pirates.
Wasn't too far off Dowser. Rasiuli was a Moroccan bandit/revolutionary in 1905. In order to gain American aid for his revolt against the Moroccan Government, he kidnapped a US diplomat named Pedcaris (NOTE: Pedcaris was not a woman as shown in the movie but a male employee of the State Department). When President Roosevelt was asked by the Secretary of State and the Secretary of War what should be done in view of Moroccan reluctance to allow US armed forces to operate within the country, he said, "Bring me Pedcaris alive or Rasuli dead and I don't care how you do it". When the Moroccan Government had their options carefully explained to them (let us in peacefully with whatever armed force we need or we will conduct a full scale invasion) they allowed the US to bring in whatever Marines were needed. When his options were explained to Rasuli, he released his hostage immediately.
John,
International politics is not a friendly gathering of national representatives arriving at mutual agreements by good will, after which they all sit around singing Kumbaya. International politics is a forum where gentlemen decide their differences based on who has the biggest club. Having the biggest club means that we get to decide whether it's their money or not. The unwillingness of our "leadership" to use the club means that our strength gets turned into weakness. The leaders of Iran, who are actually pretty good at international politics, have correctly decided that the leaders of the US have lost their nerve and will never use the overwhelming level of force at their disposal. As a result, US citizens cannot count on their government to ensure their safety when they are abroad (and, in some cases, even while inside the country). This is not recent, it's been happening for about 50 years now. It's been just a little too long since August of 1945. Today's world leaders have forgotten just what we're willing to do if we really get pissed off.
It is absolutely one of my favorite movies! I LOVED it!
Having the biggest club means that we get to decide whether it's their money or not.
Actually an international court which the US is a party to decided that it was Iran's money.
Actually an international court which the US is a party to decided that it was Iran's money.
Doesn't change the basic concept at all John, just removes it by one step. Actually, it would make holding on to the money even easier. After all, what's an international court going to do if a sovereign state tells it to go to hell? Are they going to raise outraged public opinion in the rest of the world? How many guns does outraged public opinion have? Acting in a civilized manner toward all other nations in the world is a great way to get your own nation destroyed. Acting in a civilized manner toward other nations that also act in a civilized manner is a good idea. For all others, the law of the jungle prevails. Iran does not act in a civilized manner, therefore, the law of the jungle is what it should get.
It's interesting then, the timing of the release of that money, and the "trade" of the money for the hostages that took place at that time.
At this time, I think it would be appropriate to bash Bibi.
Any takers? Gotta be a few...
Good one, Jon!
No way Jonathan. I'm not taking the bait cause I'm hopping on a plane tomorrow night for Israel so I have nothing but love for Bibi .....at least for the next 2 weeks.
Have fun PJ.
Thanks John. I'm sooooo excited! I'll take lots and lots of pics to share.
Looking forward to seeing them!
Way to go, Peej.
BTW, he's a more viable candidate than what our country is presenting us with.
And hey! Don't forget to pick up some Chinese pecans in the shook.
OMG! I'm so going to check out the shook. Thanks
The shook is in Jerusalem. Don't go on Thursday, and DEFINITELY don't go on Friday. They're closed on Saturday.
The produce you purchase in Israel is almost exclusively homegrown. Israel is an 8 hour drive from tip to tip. Therefore, everything is ultra fresh. Don't be afraid to enjoy all that freshness. If you like pistachios, you've got to get some. Big as your head. But look for things you usually enjoy. It'll be that much better if you find it there.
It's amazing Obama survived to adult hood not understanding this would be the inevitable result. Americans are now worth their weight in gold as hostages.