Lessons for Americans from Roxana Saberi's Release

Roxana Saberi, the Iranian American journalist was freed in Iran after a higher court overturned the 8-year sentence given to her for alleged (and absurd) espionage accusations. There are a number of lessons that President Obama should take form Roxana's release:

1) Talking with Iran works. Time and again, the Iranian regime has shown that it is prone to change on human rights when confronted by the international community. For instance, in the cases of the arrest of Haleh Esfandiari of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars or detainment of fifteen British soldiers in 2007, the Iranian regime promised to persecute the victims. But after the arrests received strong international criticism, the regime released the victims. Another instance relates to the state's execution of juvenile offenders, which activists in Iran have been fighting for decades to stop. But it was no coincidence that Hossein Zabhi, Iran's Deputy State Public Prosecutor, announced on October 15 of 2008 that Iran would no longer execute juvenile offenders for drug crimes; a day earlier, the United Nations member states began a debate on the rights of the child and more than 300 NGOs from eighty-two countries called on the General Assembly to take urgent action to end executions for crimes committed by children.

2) As the president of the United States, President Obama has the responsibility to speak up on human rights. Some Americans believe the United States has no moral authority on the subject and give recent examples of torture and renditions to make that point. However, the fact is that although over the past few years, the United States has engaged in questionable actions, the current scrutiny by the media and lingering possibilities of prosecution of those who were involved attest to the fact that even when America is at its worst, there is accountability. It is wrong to look at respect for human rights as black and white and conclude that the U.S. has not been perfect, it has no moral authority over a country like Iran where atrocities are not nearly comparable to anything that have ever been committed by the American government. As the oldest democracy with the strongest economy and military in the world, the United States has not only the ability, but responsibility to use its weight and leverage to push the cause of human rights.

3) Those who dismiss real violations of human rights in Iran in the name of respecting "cultural differences" need to stop. This writer has lived in Iran for sixteen years and has seen no evidence that there is any support for human rights violations in Iranian culture.

4) There are other issues non-related to its nuclear program on which to pressure Iran. The United States government--under heavy pressure from lobbyists in Washington--has exclusively obsessed about Iran's nuclear program. But the nuclear issue is the wrong issue to pressure Iran on for a number of reasons. First, as a member of NPT, Iran has the legal right to enrich uranium. Second, for a country with a young population that yeans to join the rest of the free world and build a modernized economy, the nuclear program has become a matter of national pride. Going after such an issue is likely to turn the population against those who are exerting the pressure, which in this case is the United States. That's also why the Iranian regime has been doing everything to keep the conversation on the nuclear issue. But when the United States speaks up on human rights in Iran, it has more leverage because in that area, Iran is violating the international agreements it has signed (Universal Declaration of Human Rights). And more importantly, when the President speaks up on human rights, he is making America more--not less--popular among Iranians. For these reasons, the United States both has the highest moral authority and strategic interest to make human rights the key issue for any upcoming dialogue with Iran. Doing otherwise will make President Obama look like he is sacrificing the cause of human rights in Iran by making deals with Ahmadinejad (or whoever the next poppet of the Supreme Leader is going to be), whom Iranians consider as their oppressor, not legitimately elected.

5) The case of Roxana showed the power that bloggers and citizen journalists now have to affect the actions of the American president. When Roxana Saberi was arrested, President Obama kept silent for at least a few weeks and journalists didn't fare better when it came to covering the story. But when bloggers began talking about Roxana and even demanded that President Obama speaks up, he broke his silence and demanded Saberi's release, they pushed the media to begin to cover the arrest, building momentum among international organizations like Reporters Without Borders--an international organization that fights for freedom of press worldwide--to fight for Saberi's release. This is an empowering experience that should inspire all bloggers to continue to use their platforms to push for progressive change.

6) Lastly, nonviolent action works, even in Iran. When it comes to contentious situations such as Roxana's arrest or any conflict that involves a nondemocratic state like Iran, many people--unfortunately, including many Iranians in Diaspora--believe that violence is the best and only effective way to change the Iranian regime or its behavior. But Roxana took her lessons not from these hawks, but from Akbar Ganji, another journalist who was jailed in Iran years ago. During that time, instead of calling for violence, Ganji went on an 80-day hunger strike that resulted in extensive coverage of his deteriorating health condition in jail and eventual release. Roxana took that lesson and put it to work. On April 21, Roxana went on a hunger strike inside Iran's Guantanamo style Evin Prison and stayed on for nearly two weeks. Her hunger strike led the members of Reporters Without Borders to organize their own hunger strike in solidarity with Roxana. Her hunger strike, as well as that of Reporters Without Borders were critical in continuing the mounting of international pressure on Iran that led to her release.

Roxana Saberi's story had a happy ending. But this should be the beginning of another story, and that is the United States government, as well as journalists and bloggers' speaking up about human rights atrocities in all parts of the world, rather than just Darfur.

Follow Sam Sedaei on Twitter

Follow Sam Sedaei on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SamSedaei

Comments

[BiBiJan]

As per Ms Saberi's lawyer:

""She had obtained a report that, at that time, the Center for Strategic Research had prepared on the future attack of America on Iraq (in 2003)," Nikbakht told Reuters, without saying how or when Saberi got hold of the document.

The eight-year jail sentence handed down by a lower court on April 18 was also based on the argument that she had cooperated with a hostile country, the United States, Nikbakht said.

This was later changed by the appeal court but she was still found guilty of obtaining and keeping a classified report.

"Because she did not have bad intentions and did not use it, she was sentenced to a two-year suspended jail term," he said.

Her other lawyer, Abdolsamad Khorramshahi, earlier said that Saberi in an appeal hearing on Sunday had "accepted she had made a mistake and got access to documents she should not have. But there was no transfer of any classified information."

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE54C2YP20090513?sp=true

"In their appeal, her lawyers argued that the espionage charge should be lifted because the Foreign Ministry and court had previously said that there was “no hostility between Iran and the United States.”"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/world/middleeast/12iran.html

[ArashIrandoost]

Part 3

Nonetheless, Ms. Saberi’s release reveals several points about the Islamic Republic:
* Iranian-Americans beware, the regime is watching you and is very suspicious of your trips to Iran
* Reporters, you cannot conduct objective reporting in a country such as Iran, save yourselves the trouble.
* The Mullahs justice system is flawed to the core.
* You can only negotiate with the mullahs from a position of strength (translated as zoor in Iran).

Last point is noteworthy, zoor is what mullahs know and understand. You cannot appease the mullahs and attempt to negotiate with them by showing any weakness. Russia knows it, Arabs are beginning to realize it and Brits have known it all along. That as was the case when British soldiers were arrested in the Persian Gulf, again for very serious charges, but quickly released with new clothes, gifts along with other customary Iranians courtesies.
Hopefully, na’ive Americans are catching on and perhaps that was the case with Barack Obama, resulting in Roxana’s abrupt release, and hopefully will be the case with Israel.

[ArashIrandoost]

Part 2
Ms. Saberi’s release should be viewed as an indictment of a corrupt regime and its judicial system and process. If Ms. Saberi was in fact guilty as charged and as claimed by the judicial system for such a serious crime, then why was she released? And if she was innocent, why was she arrested in the first place? Hopefully, Ms. Saberi will share her experience with the world, as a responsible journalist should, as soon as it is safe for her to do so, unless mullahs have cut a coercive deal with her not to discuss the details of experience, as one of the conditions of her release as they so masterfully have done with other Iranian-Americans arrested, jailed and released in the past. That would be very unfortunate indeed. Only time will tell! Mrs. Zahra Kazemi was not so fortunate, having been raped and tortured and killed under the presidency of uncivilized president who fooled the West by his so called Dialogue of Civilizations and as the world watched and did nothing.

[ArashIrandoost]

Western media has portrayed the release of Roxana Saberi as perhaps the softening of the regime and perhaps a smart move on the part of Ahmadinejad hoping to gain election votes, rather than highlighting the irrational and idiotic judicial process practiced in Iran. Western media should really question how is it that a journalist accused and jailed for spying and espionage charges, which are considered very serious by any government standards, would be denied basic legal representation, quickly charged, jailed, allowed proper legal representation under pressure, tried again and rather quickly released. And just how many innocent Iranians are detained almost weekly if not daily for similar baseless charges who do not enjoy Roxana Saberi or Hale Esfandiari’s visibility?

[sol313]

"although over the past few years, the United States has engaged in questionable actions, the current scrutiny by the media and lingering possibilities of prosecution of those who were involved attest to the fact that even when America is at its worst, there is accountability."

Listen, the US didn't engage in questionable acts; it engaged in unconscionable acts of "enhanced interrogation," deception, and intimidation, directed against its own citizens as well as non-citizens.

And "lingering possibilities" of prosecution are NOT a form of accountability.

[wereeverywhere]

1)There's been no* accountability so far of any US personnel over war crimes conducted at Bagram, Gitmo, Iraq, or any black site. As someone who never wants to see the horror show repeat itself, we have a responsibility to try these war criminals.

2)American journalism, despite the occasional hard hitting expose, is usually awful when it comes to much beyond US borders. The reporting before Iraq war was even bad by our low standards as the press was a cheerleader for war. There's been no accountability or substantive change here either as US journalists ignore those languishing in jails from the war on terror.

3)The Saberi scandal puts a spotlight on how a repressive, secretive government handles itself. Her release does nothing to change the process of that system for its other victims who are still jailed and harassed. Obviously I'm glad she's out, but I was hoping at least one of these three practices would change.

*except of course a handful of low ranking scape goats.

[Malco]

A couple of points Sam: America the oldest democracy? Using what criteria? Iceland has been a democracy since the about 1000AD. The Brits generally date theirs to around 1710. New Zealand enfranchised women in 1896, a quarter-century before the US. So it all depends what you actually mean by democracy.
And I suspect that losing the moral high ground could ultimately be more problematic than you suggest. What if the Iranians had tortured the living daylights out of Roxana - such as using waterboarding her a few dozen times to get her to confess to spying? How could the US have objected with a straight face?

[jimmyjones22]

Brits date theirs from 1710, yet they still had a king who actually had political power? As far as Iceland goes, it was a small community - small communities of people are generally democratic in nature - its only natural.

People generally think of America as the first experiment of democracy on a wide scale. I meeting of cave people 10,000 years ago where what appears to be a vote on a hunting party outing is technically a form of democratic process. But given the historical situation of the past 2000 years of human history, the ideas that the former British subjects in the America's espoused as the basis for founding a country were definitely a completely new animal.

Believe it or not, democratic sympathies were generally regarded as vulgar even after America was formed.

[WarSkeptic]

"People generally think of America as the first experiment of democracy on a wide scale"
Only Americans think that
America actually was not a true democracy until 1964 long after many countries in Europe had full rights for its citizens
And obviously countries who claimed democracy on paper is much much older than the US. We infact modeled our system on the French and English and even the ancient greeks a little bit

[zjr909]

Everyone needs to read Glenn Grenwald's column in today's Salon. It's a chilling tale of two countries: the first, which releases a journalist it arrested; and the second, which is still holding at least one journalist who has been cleared of any wrongdoing after years in detention. The first country is, of course, Iran; the second is the USA.

[Leslie100]

Roxana's release and the insights in Sam's piece can I hope create a challenge to similarly raise awareness and action on behalf of Laura Ling and Euna Lee who remain in North Korea. The silence about these two journalists is deafening. As a reminder ... they were working on a piece for Al Gore's Current TV when they were arrested as spys by North Korea. www.algore.com leads to a link to Current TV if you are not familiar with it. When I looked this morning I was surprised that:
#1 - There was no convient way on Al Gore's site to make a supportive comment on behalf of Laura Ling and Euna Lee ... no way to send an email at all.
#2 - There was nothing I could readily find from on Al Gore's site on the topic at all. Even though there are many recent pieces (ex. China and clean coal posted today)
#3 - There was nothing prominently mentioning the two journalists even when clicking into the Current TV link from www.algore.com either.
It is my hope that Al Gore and the US government is being very active behind the scenes though there is scant evidence of this. Let's celebrate the release of Roxana. Let's also remember Laura Ling and Euna Lee and keep their dire circumstances firmly in mind.

[anelder]

This lesson is one the bloggers and their readers ought to use to put pressure on our government regarding torture. Despite all the many ways those who were part of this human abomination there is no excuse for decent people to ignore this as a human rights violation.

I realize too many people wish to put this all behind us. What is important however is no matter how we manage to forgive others and ouselves for this sin it is imprerative that those involved in its creation be required to pay the price. Rather us than the world to hold them accountable.