Roxana Saberi Update: Positive Signs Despite a Hopeless TV Interview

ABC Television Good Morning America's summary of an interview with President Ahmadinejad

In general, there has been little news from Iran on the status of Roxana Saberi, the Iranian-American journalist sentenced last week to 8 years in prison on espionage charges. Amidst the lull in developments, some Western media are highlighting the plea by Saberi's fiancé, Iranian filmmaker Bahman Ghobadi, for her release.

The relative silence may not be bad, given signs of behind-the-scenes manoeuvres for a reduction in Saberi's sentence and possibly her release from prison. On Tuesday, Iranian spokesman Ali Reza Jamshidi reinforced weekend signals from President Ahmadinejad's office that leniency would be welcomed, "We can't influence the judge's verdict (but hope) the verdict will be reconsidered at the appeals court."

There is room for manoeuvre. Under Iran's Islamic Criminal Code, the judge has the discretion to suspend all or part of the sentence or convert it to a fine. Sentences in cases which go to appeal in Iran are almost always reduced, and other factors in favour of a reduction include Saberi's lack of a previous criminal record and the significant fact that she has not appeared on television to "confess" her crimes.

There may even be a discreet intervention by the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It was his confidante, Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, who decreed as head of the Iranian judiciary, "the necessity of access to fair consideration of Roxana Saberi's case, especially at the appeals stage, which is the certain right of the accused".

Hopefully, these positive signals will not be undermined by this morning's showboating idiocy by the American ABC Television. Their morning programme, "Good Morning America", turned a 30-minute interview with President Ahmadinejad into a self-promoting rescue of Saberi. After asking superficial questions about the US-Iranian, and more specifically the Ahmadinejad-Obama relationship (so superficial that Ahmadinejad's reply isn't shown but summarised), reporter George Stephanopoulos turned to Saberi's case.

However, instead of engaging Ahmadinejad's diversionary response, "I do not judge in judicial cases," which turned into a challenge to US concern, "to encourage friendship, [President Obama] should allow our laws to be processed fairly" --- you know, by asking why Saberi did not have a public trial and why there still has been no disclosure of evidence against her --- Stephanopoulos struck a white-knight pose, "May I go see her for myself to assure that she is safe?"

The ABC report ends with Stephanopoulos telling the studio, "We're going over to [the Judiciary Department] right now," to get permission to enter Evin prison. Let's hope that others, less publicly and much more relevantly, are moving towards a real resolution.

Comments

[ChrisE]

I wonder how influenced the authorities were by Saberi being engaged to Ghobadi- an Iranian Kurd whose films have been banned for being too nationalistic and 'separatist'?

I assume they were aware of their engagement.

[Josh Mull]

I have zero, absolutely ZERO evidence and should at this point be considered a conspiracy theorist, but I really feel like Saberi may have been up to something...less than completely legal in Iran. There are weird coincidences and circumstantial evidence (term used very loosely) that lead me to believe she may have been doing some sort of spying.

A source at DoD tells me that, during the Cold War when they were operating cargo flights in West Germany, there was a man who would sit on a lawn chair at the end of the runway and write down the tail numbers and approximate heading of every single air craft that took off. The information was likely passed on to intelligence operatives in East Germany (and presumably on to their game masters in Moscow).

That's not illegal and it's not espionage; if you can SEE it publicly, it's considered Open Source Intelligence (OSINT). However, it does show that there are more ways to be a spy than simply passing classified documents to a foreign agent.

Was Roxana doing something similar, prompting counter-intelligence services to detain her for a lesser crime? I have no idea.

Like I said, I have zero evidence and am just pulling this stuff out of thin air, but I do think there is something going on here that we don't know about.

[ChrisE]

"There are weird coincidences and circumstantial evidence (term used very loosely) that lead me to believe she may have been doing some sort of spying"

Such as? I assume you mean other than Cold War anecdotes?

[Josh Mull]

ChrisE,

Have posted in previous comments here http://enduringamerica.com/2009/04/18/analysis-iran-jails-journalist-saberi-for-8-years-on-espionage-charges/

http://www.pubrecord.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=191

“Still, an aggressive effort by the State Department to fund regime change in Iran is ongoing, but the State Department has refused to provide lawmakers with specific details of the program other than to say that the core mission of the initiative is to assist “those inside Iran who desire basic civil liberties such as freedom of expression, greater rights for women, more open political process, and broader freedom of the press.”

Congress has appropriated more than $120 million to fund the project. The State Department has spent most of the money on the U.S.-backed Radio Farda, Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe, and to broadcast Persian programs into Iran via VOA satellite television.

Some funds, according to State Department sources familiar with the how the program is run, have also been secretly funneled to exile Iranian organizations, and politically connected individuals in order to help the U.S. establish contacts with Iranian opposition groups.

In June of 2007, the State Department said it would spend $16 million on democracy promotion projects that extends beyond broadcasting. However, to date the State Department has not released details on how it intends to obligate or expend those funds.”

And

"Look at the information we do have: The Bush Administration poured millions of dollars into “regime change” and “democracy promotion” in Iran aka foreign sponsored anti-government activities aka Espionage. Some of that money went to journalists working for organizations employing Roxana, and oh by the way they got that money two years ago when for some strange coincidental reason Roxana decided it was a better idea to operate without a license, underground, rather than totally above board as she had previously.

Is that enough to convict Roxana for spying? Not even remotely. But is it enough to freak out Iranian counter-intelligence? Definitely! We might remember that their entire revolution was sparked by objection to foreign interference, they’re kind of touchy about it.

Now Secretary Clinton may think that’s a “baseless” definition of espionage, but this is predictable, since she didn’t make a peep when the Bush administration implemented these policies. Unfortunately, we don’t live in the fantasy world of the Bush years, where you can just “believe” that regime change is a good idea and that it won’t result in a horrible crack down on the Iranian population, this is 100% real life. This is exactly what they were warned about two years ago. When you openly fund anti-government activities, and ye gods you use journalists to do it(!!!), you’re not going to make the world safe for democracy, you’re going to get a lot of people hurt and a lot of people killed."

And just in case it's not clear, those who say she isn't a spy have the same amount of proof as those who say she is, that is, NONE. So we're all on the same page.

[ChrisE]

"And just in case it’s not clear, those who say she isn’t a spy have the same amount of proof as those who say she is, that is, NONE. So we’re all on the same page"

This sounds like a dangerous precedent. Is it not up to the accuser to provide proof?

Clearly the US/CIA are very likely to have assets, some journalists, in a great number of countries and yes the Bush admin made a (frankly dismal) effort to provoke regime change in Iran. On the basis of these two observations alone, there is no more evidence to arrest Saberi than any other Iranian-American, or even journalist, currently in Iran.

There is also evidence of politically motivated arrests in Iran and confessions made under duress- again, this doesn't mean there is evidence that Saberi was or wasn't a spy.

You are not even talking about circumstantial evidence- you are merely pointing out that there are US spies in Iran and thus feasibly Saberi could be one. I agree- she could. I just don't see the point, a this stage, in stating that "I really feel like Saberi may have been up to something…less than completely legal in Iran"?

I would say that a link to Iranian exiled groups, if one could be found, would be at least the start of (flimsy) circumstantial evidence.

Being engaged to the best known film maker in Iran doesn't exactly appear to make her an ideally inconspicuous candidate for a spy.