British Yachtsmen and the Media

02 January 2010 | 18:50 Code : 6488 General category
By Shahriar Sabet-Saeidi
British Yachtsmen and the Media

Once again everyone was caught by surprise hearing the news of the release of five British yachtsmen by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. But the reason for this surprise lays deep, yet again, in misunderstanding Iranian behavior and concerns as well the media’s portrayal of the incident. I have been monitoring the news for the last few days out of interest and am astonished in the way this “ consular affair”, as correctly put by the British Foreign Secretary, has been painted as a complicated diplomatic crisis even dragging in more sophisticated analysts to make unfounded and ludicrous speculations.

 The first example is BBC’s ill-judged comparison between the arrest of British sailors and detention of yachtsmen providing grounds for some Iranian circles to get more suspicious about the real identity of the yachtsmen. Comparing this incident with previous examples is completely wrong, a point that Iranian authorities very well realised and made their decision on that basis when in previous cases they also made the right decision in exercising their right to verify any violations. Previous incidents involved military personnel, and countries even on friendly terms take such violations very seriously.

 The British government made it clear to the Spanish in May 2009 over violation of it’s territorial water by Spanish navy: “The British Government are fully confident of its sovereignty over British Gibraltar Territorial Waters and continues to make this clear to Spain whenever appropriate. Such the UK must not only respond to Spain, but must also extract guarantees from Madrid that it will never happen again”

. Let’s not forget that Iran’s concern proved to be right when the interview recorded a few days before with the same crew released by the Sky later revealed part of their operation in the area was “gathering intelligence on Iranian activities in the region”. This time these were innocent sportsmen mistakenly straying into the Iranian territorial waters. Such incidents in the Persian Gulf are very common and all GCC countries and Iran detain each others citizens, mostly fishermen and other small boats, either in disputed waters or their territorial waters which is dealt with through consular channels and does not last more than few days an exercise by any sovereign country to protect its borders. One can either put the media’s take on the incident to an air of imperial arrogance and the superiority of British subjects to the fishermen in the Persian Gulf or simple ignorance to the legal and diplomatic aspects of such cases. Vague explanations on Iran’s maritime borders as if these claims are not verified or respected by international law appear in most reports leaving the readers assuming that this is another case of piracy or hostage taking rather than two sovereign states trying to protect their interests and citizens dealing on equal terms through civilized rules. 

 The media in Britain have a tendency to attack governments, police forces or judiciaries of other countries as “incompetent”, “brutal” or “flawed” while a British citizen is victim of a crime be it in Portugal or Japan where the police could not find the suspects, or when commits a crime in UAE, Egypt, Greece or Turkey an approach which is neither helpful to families nor to diplomats working hard and unnoticed to resolve the issue.

 The other example of this is the Times newspaper, which I am a subscriber and admirer, informing its readers yesterday of Iran’s record of “snatching” people throughout history and like others linked the detention to Iran’s diplomatic row over its nuclear case with the West and today concluded that "Iran dashes release hopes".

The reason for this conclusion is because of comments by Rahim-Mashaei "President Ahmadinejad’s hardline chief of staff" a man who the Times translated his appointment just a few months ago as in defiance of Conservatives and Ayatollah Khamenei because he is perceived soft on Israel and a liberal.

 Even Channel4 news last night suggested that the arrest has been made so Arash Hejazi, the witness of Neda Agha Sultan’s death who is now in Britain and accused by some in Iran to be a suspect in Neda’s death, be extradited to Iran in return of the yachtsmen release, an advice which was well ignored by Iranian authorities.

  I can feel the heat in FCO over such speculations and how in 2007 a last minute release of the British sailors was put on hold by Iran only because of the way the media reacted and treated Iran. I’m sure that the officials and families were very well aware of this negative effect and that is why they decided to keep the news secret and let the FCO deal with the matter.

 This concern is very well shown in Miliband’s comments as well that: "This is a human story of five young yachtsmen. It’s got nothing to do with politics, it’s got nothing to do with nuclear enrichment programmes... it has no relationship to any of the other, bigger issues."

  The freedom of speech is a gift to be appreciated but endangering the fate of fellow citizens only to produce hot headline is a matter which needs to be seriously reviewed and thought of specially when it comes to a country which is very sensitive to its image and the way it’s treated, a country that looks into the every single news carefully and differentiates between a “meeting” with its ambassador and him being “summoned” and reacts accordingly.

In this case however Iranian authorities showed how they can address such a case as a regular consular affair in a professional manner without keeping the British citizens in return of Arash Hejazi or letting the country build more nuclear enrichment facilities disappointing many who were expecting a full blown crisis.

 Once again there was a miscalculation over the intentions of Iran or even IRGC and it was an opportunity for Iran to show that if it is only exercising its rights and does not intend to go beyond that. If right language is used at the right level with no threats involved, the response will be likewise and certainly this time skilful diplomats at both ends with the experience of similar incidents in mind could resolve the issue swiftly.

It is time for analysts and prestigious media, as much as idealistic this may sound, to try to contribute more to the public knowledge rather than plummeting into a popular discourse interested by their least knowledgeable audience preparing grounds for more conflict and clash between nations and states. The current line certainly does not serve national interests or security of this country or its citizens and makes the job of British diplomats harder when they try to address such matters. Regular “briefings” by the government has always helped the media to recognize correctly where national interests and security of the country is at stake and these “briefings” maybe extremely helpful with respect to a country like Iran and easing the pressure on diplomats dealing with a crisis.

 I’m sure there is a better way to look at these issues with a better understanding between governments and the media without compromising freedom of speech.

Once again everyone was caught by surprise hearing the news of the release of five British yachtsmen by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. But the reason for this surprise lays deep, yet again, in misunderstanding Iranian behavior and concerns as well the media’s portrayal of the incident. I have been monitoring the news for the last few days out of interest and am astonished in the way this “ consular affair”, as correctly put by the British Foreign Secretary, has been painted as a complicated diplomatic crisis even dragging in more sophisticated analysts to make unfounded and ludicrous speculations. The first example is BBC’s ill-judged comparison between the arrest of British sailors and detention of yachtsmen providing grounds for some Iranian circles to get more suspicious about the real identity of the yachtsmen. Comparing this incident with previous examples is completely wrong, a point that Iranian authorities very well realised and made their decision on that basis when in previous cases they also made the right decision in exercising their right to verify any violations. Previous incidents involved military personnel, and countries even on friendly terms take such violations very seriously. The British government made it clear to the Spanish in May 2009 over violation of it’s territorial water by Spanish navy: “The British Government are fully confident of its sovereignty over British Gibraltar Territorial Waters and continues to make this clear to Spain whenever appropriate. Such the UK must not only respond to Spain, but must also extract guarantees from Madrid that it will never happen again”. Let’s not forget that Iran’s concern proved to be right when the interview recorded a few days before with the same crew released by the Sky later revealed part of their operation in the area was “gathering intelligence on Iranian activities in the region”. This time these were innocent sportsmen mistakenly straying into the Iranian territorial waters. Such incidents in the Persian Gulf are very common and all GCC countries and Iran detain each others citizens, mostly fishermen and other small boats, either in disputed waters or their territorial waters which is dealt with through consular channels and does not last more than few days an exercise by any sovereign country to protect its borders. One can either put the media’s take on the incident to an air of imperial arrogance and the superiority of British subjects to the fishermen in the Persian Gulf or simple ignorance to the legal and diplomatic aspects of such cases. Vague explanations on Iran’s maritime borders as if these claims are not verified or respected by international law appear in most reports leaving the readers assuming that this is another case of piracy or hostage taking rather than two sovereign states trying to protect their interests and citizens dealing on equal terms through civilized rules.  The media in Britain have a tendency to attack governments, police forces or judiciaries of other countries as “incompetent”, “brutal” or “flawed” while a British citizen is victim of a crime be it in Portugal or Japan where the police could not find the suspects, or when commits a crime in UAE, Egypt, Greece or Turkey an approach which is neither helpful to families nor to diplomats working hard and unnoticed to resolve the issue. The other example of this is the Times newspaper, which I am a subscriber and admirer, informing its readers yesterday of Iran’s record of “snatching” people throughout history and like others linked the detention to Iran’s diplomatic row over its nuclear case with the West and today concluded that "Iran dashes release hopes". The reason for this conclusion is because of comments by Rahim-Mashaei "President Ahmadinejad’s hardline chief of staff" a man who the Times translated his appointment just a few months ago as in defiance of Conservatives and Ayatollah Khamenei because he is perceived soft on Israel and a liberal . Even Channel4 news last night suggested that the arrest has been made so Arash Hejazi, the witness of Neda Agha Sultan’s death who is now in Britain and accused by some in Iran to be a suspect in Neda’s death, be extradited to Iran in return of the yachtsmen release, an advice which was well ignored by Iranian authorities.  I can feel the heat in FCO over such speculations and how in 2007 a last minute release of the British sailors was put on hold by Iran only because of the way the media reacted and treated Iran. I’m sure that the officials and families were very well aware of this negative effect and that is why they decided to keep the news secret and let the FCO deal with the matter. This concern is very well shown in Miliband’s comments as well that: "This is a human story of five young yachtsmen. It’s got nothing to do with politics, it’s got nothing to do with nuclear enrichment programmes... it has no relationship to any of the other, bigger issues."  The freedom of speech is a gift to be appreciated but endangering the fate of fellow citizens only to produce hot headline is a matter which needs to be seriously reviewed and thought of specially when it comes to a country which is very sensitive to its image and the way it’s treated, a country that looks into the every single news carefully and differentiates between a “meeting” with its ambassador and him being “summoned” and reacts accordingly. In this case however Iranian authorities showed how they can address such a case as a regular consular affair in a professional manner without keeping the British citizens in return of Arash Hejazi or letting the country build more nuclear enrichment facilities disappointing many who were expecting a full blown crisis. Once again there was a miscalculation over the intentions of Iran or even IRGC and it was an opportunity for Iran to show that if it is only exercising its rights and does not intend to go beyond that. If right language is used at the right level with no threats involved, the response will be likewise and certainly this time skilful diplomats at both ends with the experience of similar incidents in mind could resolve the issue swiftly. It is time for analysts and prestigious media, as much as idealistic this may sound, to try to contribute more to the public knowledge rather than plummeting into a popular discourse interested by their least knowledgeable audience preparing grounds for more conflict and clash between nations and states. The current line certainly does not serve national interests or security of this country or its citizens and makes the job of British diplomats harder when they try to address such matters. Regular “briefings” by the government has always helped the media to recognize correctly where national interests and security of the country is at stake and these “briefings” maybe extremely helpful with respect to a country like Iran and easing the pressure on diplomats dealing with a crisis. I’m sure there is a better way to look at these issues with a better understanding between governments and the media without compromising freedom of speech.