Looks like she was arrested the week before Russia invaded Ukraine (tho IRC, there was saber-rattling before the actual invasion.). Poor timing on her part.
And if
this article is to be believed, she has played in Russia for several years, and earned $1 mill there as opposed to $220k stateside. Right now in my preferred sport of golf, several players are being criticized for their perceived venality for grabbing at Saudi coin. I’m not outraged (another term I see in the news/commentary) that the pursuit of such profit comes with some risk.
And I would say that policy is fine if you don’t think the United States should be engaged in global business. Since I don’t want to see the U.S. economy be like that of North Korea, I prefer a situation where we do business with many countries, and where our State Department and government makes it known that arbitrary detention of Americans is going to raise America’s ire.
Well, I don’t think N Korea is the only alternative model. We get to choose who we do business with. I would imagine there is more of a risk involved in doing business in Russia, as opposed to - say - Denmark.
There are countless reasons to do business with sketchier regimes. But going in, one ought to be awfully clear of what the rules and risks are, and ought to coordinate w/ the US government to ascertain exactly what assistance will be provided if it turns out one doesn’t get to simply skip home with sacks of cash.
Before Ukraine was invaded (and, in fact, even still) Russia was the site of billions of dollars of investment from the United States, including from some of our largest, most established businesses. Executives from our country were in Russia continuously and frequently as a regular matter of habit.
These business relationships had been explicitly encouraged by over 30 years of U.S. policy.
I want the US to emphatically and unambiguously represent US citizens when abroad. It doesn’t matter if the citizens are right or wrong or whether they should have known better. There should be no question in any country’s mind that the US is behind its citizens.
And in a case like this one or @Martin_Hyde 's where the state is not operating in good faith – what does it even mean to be guilty? A state that is willing to over-sentence so egregiously is willing to frame innocent people.
The US is a big country and it is unrealistic to expect that its citizens won’t end up in Russia or North Korea or hiking along the border of Iran or navigating waters adjacent to Iran. Protecting and representing its citizens abroad is just part of the price of being a country.
How do you feel about people who fish the ocean for a living? Every now and then, one of these boats ends up in distress and/or sinks, and the US Coast Guard spends a substantial amount of time/money (and incurs significant risk to their own personnel) in an effort to find and rescue the people who were working on that boat. Should we abolish Coast Guard rescue services and simply consign those money-grubbing seafarers to their fate? After all, they were free to choose whether or not to work in a safer occupation.
Similarly, should there be disaster assistance for people who live in flood plains, quake zones, or fire/hurricane-prone areas?
Well, you are stretching things considerably beyond my OP, I think. We’ve discussed in the past how people’s opinions differ as to efforts/costs involved in rescuing people who get lost in mountains and such. And flood areas? Well, I’m not sure I’m a fan of the gov’t paying to repeatedly rebuild a home that has been flooded repeatedly. There’s plenty of high land around. If you can’t afford flood/earthquake/fire/hurricane insurance, maybe you should live elsewhere. But if we are talking generally about assuming risk and spreading costs, I’m the jerk who would probably ration public health care - or certainly increase copays/premiums - for folk whose lifestyle choices contributed to their illnesses.
I agree, to the extent that the embassy (or whatever) should look to the person’s interests. Maybe offer the equivalent of a public defender, see that they are not mistreated. But I start having problems when - as in this case - the discussion turns to such things as exchanging a convicted Russian arms dealer.
People say travellers ought not be treated WORSE b/c they are US citizens, but should they be treated BETTER? For example, I imagine (rightly or wrongly) many prisons in central/South America or parts of Asia and Africa are hellholes. If that is where a native ends up for committing a certain offense, ought I not expect to as well?
There’s no evidence the U.S. is interested in exchanging Bout for Griner, and I am not sure they would be due to the optics. Keep in mind while Brittany Griner is getting the most attention, in many respects the fate of U.S. Marine Paul Whelan who is held in Russia on entirely manufactured charges has been ongoing with high level attention for years now. Often times when dealing with hostage taker countries if any swaps are made some effort is put into resolving older cases first, although there are a lot of caveats.
FWIW I’d be fine with trading Bout for Americans wrongfully detained like Paul Whelan–he did not receive a life sentence, so he actually is going to be released in a few years anyway. And his arms dealing empire was based on a network of contacts and relationships in the remnants of the Soviet military industrial complex that just doesn’t exist any longer, Bout won’t really be able to resume his activities once he is eventually released.
Also keep in mind the fact that Putin has several people he has literally arrested on what, virtually all independent sources agree, are manufactured charges, the idea that we should trust him to treat any American fairly is absurd on face.
A big difference between this (and your other examples) and the situation your OP is asking about is the real costs being born to protect the interests of Americans abroad is fairly small in the context of the government. FEMA and the NFIP paying, in some cases over 10 times, to rebuild at the same property is pretty stupid, and costs us tens of billions of dollars in operating the NFIP. The government doesn’t really operate traditional health insurance publicly, so that is kind of a hypothetical. Medicare is an old age program intentionally intended to limit the societal negatives of elderly people having no health care access so doesn’t quite fit the bill.
The trust that the United States has our backs facilitates literally trillions of dollars in American overseas investment and trade, the benefits are massive and the costs are fairly paltry–typically minor concessions, trade of low level prisoners, and occasionally for places like North Korea sending a retired politician to the country for a PR photo.
Yesterday while listening to the new at work (I was in an office as opposed to the sales floor) there was a discussion of that very topic an the Russian “expert” (have no idea if he actually is or not) said a 5 year sentence would be likely for a Russian in a similar circumstance.
I can’t confirm that, but it doesn’t sound too outlandish to me given that cannabis is illegal in Russia. There is also an element of using the law as a tool of government in Russia going way back, so it’s entirely possible that a Russian’s treatment and/or sentencing may be affected by how the authorities view that person, even whether or not such a person is ever arrested.
Allegedly, Griner isn’t being treated badly by Russian standards. There are some issues with her height - the legal and penal system in Russia is geared towards people of standard height, which Griner exceeds, so she has mentioned not fitting into the bed in her cell and she doesn’t fit particularly well in the “defense cage” in court. I could find no reports of her being beaten, assaulted, or deprived of food. I’m sure it sucks to be in jail anywhere, and probably more than average in Russia, it doesn’t sound like she’s being treated any worse than any other inmate accused of a similar crime.
Unfortunately, it appears she did, in fact, bring a substance into Russia that is illegal there. I’m assuming her defense team is trying to spin this as someone forgetting to remove prescribed medication from their possessions prior to going to another country, as opposed to actual drug smuggling. Is that going to get her any mercy? I have absolutely no idea. There’s the argument that an experienced traveler would/should know better but we’re all human and it’s easy to forget if you’re in a hurry or preoccupied with something. There’s concern that being black and/or homosexual will also count against her, but I don’t know if that’s being used against her or not.
I honestly don’t know if she’s getting a fair trial and fair treatment in Russia or not, but it’s not helping her that she actually did break the law. That makes me suspect that she was not singled out for being an American. I hope that she can maybe just be fined and deported from Russia, but she might wind up spending years there. I do hope that she’s OK in the end.
It does seem to be the case. Griner does have a authorization for medical marijuana in the US, she does use vape and cartridge forms of it, and thus it is entirely plausible that things might have played out as described in court. I don’t trust the Russians, either, but at present, with my current information (always subject to change with new data) this looks not only plausible but likely. Between Griner’s admission and the approach her defense is taking yeah, I think she did bring cannabis oil into Russia.
And this is the big concern - that Griner might be treated more harshly than a Russian simply because she’s American (with a couple sides of “because she’s black” and “because she’s a lesbian”). Which is why a spotlight on her case is helpful. It’s no guarantee but there’s some hope that with the world (or at least the US) watching the Russians might be less inclined to treat her more harshly than a Russian. But we can’t know for sure until the whole thing plays out.