![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
chessdev.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpolitics2012-05-23 07:20 am
Pakistan jails doctor who helped CIA find Osama bin Laden - 33 year sentence
Updated at 8:18 a.m. ET: PESHAWAR, Pakistan -- A Pakistani doctor accused of helping the CIA find Osama bin Laden was convicted of high treason and sentenced to 33 years in prison on Wednesday.
Shakil Afridi ran a vaccination program for the American intelligence agency to collect DNA and verify bin Laden's presence at the compound in the town of Abbottabad, where he was killed last May by U.S. commandos.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has previously called for Afridi to be released, saying his work served Pakistani and American interests.
Afridi was also ordered to pay a fine of about $3,500, Nasir Khan, a government official in the Khyber tribal area, told The Associated Press. If he doesn't pay, he will spend another three and half years in prison, Khan said.
His imprisonment is likely to anger ally Washington at a sensitive time, with both sides engaged in difficult talks over re-opening NATO supply routes to U.S.-led troops in Afghanistan.
U.S. officials had hoped Pakistan, a recipient of billions of dollars in American aid, would release Afridi. He was detained after the unilateral operation which killed bin Laden and strained ties with Islamabad.
In January, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in a television interview that Afridi and his team had been key in finding bin Laden, describing him as helpful and insisting the doctor had not committed treason or harmed Pakistan
[chessdev] WTF!?!? Allegedly these guys are our allies in the "War on Terror". And they sure are quick to accept billions of dollars in American aid, including after several earthquakes... BUT we find Bin Laden virtually down the street from their government AND they're going out of their way to punish people who helped get Bin Laden???
My first thought for balancing the budget would be to withdraw some of the aid we're giving that government -- if they're going to take our money and still try to screw us over, then let's give it to OUR causes and let *those* screw us over instead...
Or is there some rationale that isnt as sinister as I'm thinking for why they would sentence this guy so harshly?
no subject
Like I can't imagine America going "oh, yeah we're cool with that, American citizen involved in that."
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
No, none of that is why this doctor is in prison. Pakistan put this guy in jail because he embarrassed them, and there is a strong disapproval in Pakistan over US military incursions, and someone had to pay. To me though, it points to Pakistan not wanting Bin Laden caught, and there are more than likely plenty of elements within the Pakistani government that may have actually been helping Bin Laden. It would seem the US government would agree with me, as they cite this as the major reason they didn't inform Pakistan of the raid in the first place, and I doubt the doctor knew anything about a raid regardless.
no subject
in·vade
verb /inˈvād/
invaded, past participle; invaded, past tense; invades, 3rd person singular present; invading, present participle
(of an armed force or its commander) Enter (a country or region) so as to subjugate or occupy it
- it was all part of a grander French plan to invade Ireland
- they would invade at dawn
Enter (a place, situation, or sphere of activity) in large numbers, esp. with intrusive effect
- demonstrators invaded the presidential palace
(of a parasite or disease) Spread into (an organism or bodily part)
(of a person or emotion) Encroach or intrude on
- he felt his privacy was being invaded
no subject
And yet no international body (like the UN) seems to have a complaint. While it is true Pakistan is butt hurt over it, that is their own problem and their own fault, as they couldn't be trusted. I don't see how a doctor giving the phone number of a Al-Qaeda message boy to a allies intelligence service enabled any sort of "invasion." He was just a fall guy because there had to be one. What the doctor did doesn't fit treason.
Let me just ask you this. Do you think that the doctor deserved 33 years for helping capture the most wanted mass murder, considering he couldn't trust all elements of his own government to do it right? Lets forget about arguing about definitions, and just view this from a moral prospective.
no subject
no subject
no subject
If an American doctor was found giving DNA evidence to MI6, without the express consent of the CIA, we would make an example of him. It's not the sort of precedent you set. The American born Russian spies who basically only made friends with politicians are getting the same treatment.
no subject
I suppose. But this of course was to provide context. And we do aid Pakistan to fight terrorism, and that is exactly what this doctor was doing. Spying on terrorist to fight terrorism.
You can't compare the two situations because they aren't comparable. The British don't give us a huge amount of money to do something that we really don't do and can't be trusted to do ourselves. Pakistanis aren't afforded the same rights in Pakistan as Americans in America (as far as I know).
The American born Russian spies who basically only made friends with politicians are getting the same treatment.
Except those Russian spies were infiltrating government to spy. They were spying on US citizens and officials in the US government. It isn't remotely comparable to a doctor who gave DNA samples to the CIA to search for matches of the Bin Laden family, who is a international fugitive.
no subject
I understand the United States did not trust Pakistan with this information. And I'm glad he was willing to work for us. And I think we should have absolutely offered him amnesty into the United States. But regardless of our relationship with their nation, that sort of behavior is not acceptable.
You get caught spying for another country, even if you aren't passing over state secrets, you go to jail. There's no reputable or disreputable country where that's not true.
no subject
This seems contradictory? Is the behavior not acceptable, or are you glad about it?
Well, that may be true. But originally my response was to mylaptopisevil comment about finding a context. I was trying to demonstrate that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to find a comparable situation that would concern a U.S. citizen that would provide said "context".
That my be true, but I'm not convinced that an American citizen would go to jail for treason for handing over information about a internationally wanted fugitive to another countries (who is an ally) spy agency, unless of course doing so betrayed the US in some way. Perhaps there could be an argument made that not giving it to US authorities instead hurt the prestige of America? Is that really treason though? Can the state really say 'you made us look stupid, so we are charging you with treason'? I don't know the answers to these questions.
no subject
But the United States conducting a military operation in a country without the express permission of that country is potentially an act of war. One that Pakistani would understandably grumble about and not act upon. But it is definitely spying, and something that a country that wants sovereignty and international respect should be offended about.
What I want and what is in the best interest of another foreign country are not the same thing. I am glad that the United States acted in the best interest of the United States, considering that I am a citizen of the US and gain benefit from bin Laden's death. But I also recognize that this Pakistani doctor showed disloyalty to his country and agreed to work for our country. He made decisions that have consequences, and as a Pakistani citizen, he is going to suffer the consequences as dictated by his country, not ours. The United States should have recognized this and acted to protect their asset from these consequences. Given him US citizenship, so he could discard his Pakistani citizenship and the expectations that derive from that citizenship.
no subject
I see, before it wasn't clear you were differentiating between your opinion and that of the Pakistani government.
The United States should have recognized this and acted to protect their asset from these consequences. Given him US citizenship, so he could discard his Pakistani citizenship and the expectations that derive from that citizenship.
Why don't you think we did that?
no subject
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. "
How would working for an allies foreign intelligence agency to find a wanted fugitive be charged with treason in the US?
no subject
The United States instead illegally spied on Pakistani residents and transgressed against Pakistani's sovereignty.
They might have done it to abduct a non-Pakistani citizen, but they also acted as Pakistani's enemy by choosing to conduct an illegal military incursion on Pakistani soil. A Pakistani doctor gave the US aid and comfort.
If Mexico conducted a military strike on American soil, it wouldn't matter if the target was the US government or a random Drug Lord. They would have expected a request for the US government to conduct the strike, or at the very least ask permission. The act of force within our borders is not acceptable, and anyone abetting the Mexican government in such an attack would absolutely be guilty of treason.
no subject