· Syria claims to have played leading role
By Julian Borger, Michael Howard in Baghdad,
Robert Tait in Tehran
Thursday April 5, 2007
Guardian
The release of the 15 Britons was a "gift" to the British people to celebrate the birth of the prophet Muhammad and Easter, according to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It also came two hours after an American general revealed the US might allow Iranian diplomats to visit five countrymen arrested in Iraq three months ago.
The timing has fuelled speculation of a deal to free the British sailors and marines seized by Iranian Revolutionary Guards. In a further coincidence, yesterday's unexpected announcement came a day after the mysterious release of another Iranian diplomat, Jalal Sharafi, kidnapped in Baghdad at the beginning of the year by gunmen in Iraqi government uniforms.
The 13-day crisis was enveloped in a fog of secret diplomacy and informal talks. The Syrians claim to have played a leading role in persuading Iran of the foolishness in detaining the Britons any longer. Iran's decision may have been the culmination of many reasons, but observers say Tehran must have been convinced it was in its interests to give up its bargaining chips.
The existence of a deal was denied by all involved. George Bush insisted there would be no "quid pro quo". British officials said they had Iranian assurances a prisoner swap was not on the agenda, and President Ahmadinejad was adamant the release was for "humanitarian reasons".
Yesterday the Iraqi foreign minister, who appears to have played a critical go-between role, added his voice to the chorus of denial. "The British media are linking it as if it is part of bargain with Iran to release the British sailors and marines. It has no connection whatsoever", Hoshyar Zebari told The Guardian yesterday.
Mr Zebari said he had asked the US military to grant consular access to the Iranian diplomats (known as the "Irbil five" after the town in which they were arrested) in a bid to "ease the atmosphere" between Iran and the US at the time of last month's Baghdad security conference.
The US military spokesman, Major General William Caldwell said authorities were considering the request for access.
A Source Close To The Revolutionary Guards Gave A Different Account:
The fate of the Irbil five was not a motive for the capture, he said, but it did become a negotiating point after the event. "Officially there is no swap. But there should not be a double standard. You want access [to your prisoners]. We want access [to ours]."Special Rreport:
He provided the first comprehensive Iranian version of events on March 23 when the 15 Britons were captured by Revolutionary Guard sailors on the shallow seas of the northern Gulf. Not only had the British patrol strayed into Iranian waters, he claimed, but it was at least the fourth such incursion in three months.
"They came to our waters before ... at least three times," the Iranian source said. "We gave them notice that you shouldn't be. We didn't use aggressive methods. We didn't shoot [across the British bows]. Both sides know the sensitive atmosphere."
The source explained that the Britons had been captured by low-ranking Revolutionary Guards, but once arrested, their release required intervention on a higher level. That was delayed by the No Rouz (new year) holidays which only ended on Tuesday.
"Junior people got them, but only senior people could let them go, and they can only let them go after an investigation," he said. During No Rouz, he added, "everyone is in the villages and mobile phones don't work there."
The US refusal to exclude the use of military force against Iran to stop its nuclear programme, together with a series of separatist attacks in Iran's border regions had put the Revolutionary Guard on alert for incursions.
"They are on a yellow state of readiness," the source said. "We don't believe the British intent is to start a war, but America has said it is on the table."
The investigation into the incident would have run its course and the Britons would have been released, but the affair was complicated by Tony Blair's decision to take the matter to the UN security council last Wednesday, he added.
Analysts in Tehran said the British crew provided a convenient tool for the Iranian government at a time it was casting around for a means to strike back against an Anglo-American policy of isolation.
Iran's leadership had become alarmed about UN sanctions over its nuclear programme as well as the seizure of diplomats and operatives in Iraq. Wary of striking at the US directly, the Iranians saw the sailors as an opportunity to humiliate Britain.
"Iran was seeking the chance to get something out of Britain," said Mohammad Atrianfar, a commentator with close ties to moderate figures in the Iranian regime.
"The issue isn't important militarily but it has been useful politically."
The return of Mr Sharafi to Iran on Tuesday and the prospect of access to the Irbil five strengthened the hand of President Ahmadinejad, according to Issa Saharkhiz, another political analyst.
The Britons' televised "confessions" have served an internal political purpose - convincing a sceptical public that Iran is threatened by a determined enemy.
Full Iran coverage
Related Article:
04.04.2007:
Named: the missing personnel
Map:
The Shatt al-Arab waterway
Q&A03.04.2007:
The seized British sailors
Full Text 30.03.2007:
Faye Turney's third letter
30.03.2007:
Faye Turney's second letter
29.03.2007:
Faye Turney's first letter
Analysis30.03.2007:
Julian Borger: Britain stumbles in diplomatic dance with Iran
Comment:
Jamshid Ahmadi: The talking cure
30.03.2007:
Ronan Bennett: A peculiar outrage
27.03.2007:
Max Hastings: A warning of grief ahead over Iran
No comments:
Post a Comment