Oh I don’t disagree on those points. Another point. It was not a planned assasination. At least I never got that impression. It was a capture gone bad (well good actually IMO).
I’m very disgruntled with Pakistan but I also understand why they have a beef with us over some things. What it all comes down to though is Pakistan is a terrible ally, they have been for a long time. In truth we didn’t start doing really shitty things to them in this alliance until we invaded Afghanistan, and even then we didn’t really start doing things like violating Pakistani air space and etc until relatively late in that conflict.
On the flip side, Pakistan has been taking billions from us for many years and working against our interests almost as much as our outright enemies like North Korea and Iran have. It just makes no sense. Christopher Hitchens and me didn’t see eye to eye on much of anything, but he was consistently right about the American relationship with Pakistan. We were supporting very bad people for no gain, and in fact they worked against our interests more often than not.
We should end all support of Pakistan and develop closer ties with India, which while not a perfectly functioning democracy is a much more natural ally of America than Pakistan has ever been.
That is not the problem here. The Pakistani military has run the country for decades and they’re not going anywhere. Aside from the “treason” issue, they’re punishing Afridi harshly because they are very pissed off and embarrassed. The discovery that Bin Laden was hiding in a major military town implies very strongly that Pakistani intelligence knew where he was, and they’re very unhappy that the rest of the world knows about it. That’s why their response to the raid has been cutting cooperation with the U.S. and imprisoning this guy.
Yeah, I’ve revisited his writing lately (and I suspect it shows in more than a few of my recent posts) and he was right about this one. I’ve argued for cooperating with Pakistan to “contain” the country, but at this point I think the truth is that the ISI and military have been playing the U.S. for saps for years. They know what buttons to push and they manage to get more and more aid in return for being almost the worst ally anybody could imagine; meanwhile India has to watch this go on and on.
I recall a story back in the 1980s, I think it was, about a couple of Jewish-Americans convicted of spying for Israel. They were imprisoned, not deported.
It was Hep B vaccine, which requires three shots. The idea was to give shots to the local kids and test the DNA from the needles to see if the Bin Laden family was in the area. They only gave one shot before moving on.
I don’t know if only giving one shot put their health in danger, but it was a violation of their trust, and distrust is apparently the main obstacle hindering vaccination efforts in that part of the world.
There are both federal laws and UCMJ provisions for espionage, treason, and spying that may apply, in addition to whatever other criminal charges might apply. A US citizen would not normally be deported. I can’t think of a case in the history of spying and espionage where that has happened, though I suppose if someone had dual citizenship it may be possible.
This might be helpful, as would the entry on “espionage”, which has other links like the Espionage Act of 1917: United States government security breaches - Wikipedia
If you highlight all instances of “espionage” you can see it is a very common charge.
Just to add more detail, the Hep B vaccine requires three rounds of shots. 1st shot, 2nd shot a month later, 3rd shot 6 months after the 2nd shot. So a very lengthy procedure. Dr. Shakil Afridi’s program only gave the 1st shot, then moved on. The 1st shot was “real”, but the vaccine is not effective unless all three rounds are given. I can’t understand why they wouldn’t just keep the program going (with a different doctor if need be). MODIDALIZE, I very much agree with your last sentence.
From what I can tell, he was not charged with running a fake vaccine program, or privacy violations (from collecting DNA w/o consent). He was charged/sentenced for violating four separate laws (10year sentence+10+10+3) that basically equate to helping the US violate Pakistan’s sovereignty from the bin laden raid.
It turns out, he was not jailed for helping the CIA. See Washington Post (from AP) article:
Checkmate Pakistan, it appears. What does this change?
^
Thats just been reported now?
Yes. The AP got a copy of the judgment/verdict and reported the findings today.
The jurisdiction in which Shakil Afridi was tried holds trials in secret and he is not allowed a lawyer, so it would be difficult to know for sure without the judgment or someone who was present during the trial. Obviously, the timing suggested it was related to the bin laden raid (and of course it is, just not technically anymore).
That depends. Is it the least bit credible?
Here is the actual judgement.
[QUOTE=CoolHandCox]
The jurisdiction in which Shakil Afridi was tried holds trials in secret and he is not allowed a lawyer, so it would be difficult to know for sure without the judgment or someone who was present during the trial. Obviously, the timing suggested it was related to the bin laden raid (and of course it is, just not technically anymore).
[/QUOTE]
Niether is true.
I assume you’re our only lawyer in Pakistan, AK84. What’s your view on this case?
What sort of view.
Do you think this is being handled properly? Is he being punished for collaboration with the U.S. or with this militant, and was the trial on the level?
-
From what I can see from the judgement, his trial was unremarkable in the technical sense. His crimes were committed in that area and the District Magistrate has jurisdiction. As for the correctness of the verdict, well I have not seen the Court record (transcripts of evidence, exhibits etc) which would lead to an informed opinion and those are not likely to be forthcoming for some time as they are undoubtedly being prepped by the Court for the likely appeal or Judicial review.
-
I have no idea what the motivations of the prosecutors are; the Federal Government certainly would not approve of his or any public servant being in the employ of a foreign intelligence agency and that would undoubtedly have being a major consideration in the decision to try him.
-
I do not think it has been handled correctly, far to much misinformation is flying around especially at a time when attempts are being made to negotiate with NATO and ISAF as to the final settlement with respect to Afghanistan.
I got that from Pakistani newspaper articles, however, I am not familiar with the newspaper itself and its credibility.
The Express Tribune - a secretive tribal court and anotherarticle here (“Afridi was convicted in a secret trial held by the Assistant Political Agent of the Khyber Tribal Agency. The trial was secret and, so far as I know, no lawyer appeared on behalf of Dr Afridi.”). I understood it to be an old (colonial) statute that did not provide for legal representation in that region. However, with everything being incorrect so far, this being wrong wouldn’t surprise me.
Express Tribune is not exactly known for letting the facts get in the way of a good story. And Fesial Naqvi who wrote the second article is acorporate and commercial lawyer and I have the greatest of respect for him. However, he is out of his depth here.
Interesting development. Here’s an opinion piece with some insightful perspectives.