England expects; or, I cannot answer that question, sir.
Posted by gigantichound on 28 Mar 2007 at 05:38 pm | Tagged as: Current Events
I’m trying to get inside Leading Seaman Turney’s head. (Sordid details here.)
“Obviously we trespassed into their waters,” British sailor Faye Turney said on the video broadcast by Al-Alam, an Arabic-language, Iranian state-run television station that is carried across the Middle East.
“They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, nice people. They explained to us why we’ve been arrested, there was no harm, no aggression,” she said.
It also showed what appeared to be a handwritten letter from Turney to her family. The letter said, in part, “I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologize for us entering their waters.’’
Does the Royal Navy really do no training at all in behaviour on capture? I guess it’s possible – there isn’t a large-scale tradition of naval POWs. On the other hand, Cornwall’s crew, or at least her boarding parties, clearly counted as prone-to-capture troops. The AP story explains:
In 2004, eight British sailors were captured as they were delivering a patrol boat to the Iraqi Riverine Patrol Service. Britain described the mission as “routine” but Tehran accused them entering Iranian waters illegally.
A day later, Iran said the sailors would be put on trial, and Iranian TV broadcast video of them blindfolded and sitting on the ground. Two of them later read a statement of apology for entering Iran’s territorial waters, saying it was a mistake.
The sailors later told reporters they had been mistreated and subjected to mock executions.
So either this is a serious, serious training failure which should be ending careers at the Admiralty, or Turney should be looking at the business end of a court martial. There were Commonwealth POWs who co-operated with German propaganda broadcasts during the Second World War (though not the week after capture), and many of them ended up doing serious prison time for treason. Two Canadians served 25 years in Dorchester for this kind of thing, if memory serves.
Here’s more!
Dear Mum & Dad,
I am writing to you from Iran where I am being held. I will try to explain to you the best what has happened. We were out in the boats when we were arrested by Iranian forces as we had apparently gone into Iranian waters. I wish we hadn’t because then I’d be home with you all right now. I am so sorry we did, because I know we wouldn’t be here now if we hadn’t. I want you all to know that I am well and safe. I am being well looked after. I am fed three meals a day and have a constant supply of fluids.
The people are friendly and hospitable, very compassionate and warm. I have written a letter to the Iranian people to apologize for us entering into their waters. Please don’t worry about me, I am staying strong. Hopefully it won’t be long until I am home to get ready for Molly’s birthday party with a present from the Iranian people.
Is this woman an adult?
I would want to know more about Iranian methods of persuasion before rushing to judgment here.
I’m with lawgeek — as is the BBC
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6503657.stm)
and the British Foreign Secretary.
As to the comment about whether the woman is an adult or not, II’m not quite sure where that comes from. First of all the language (“compassionate”, “hospitable”) is very adult, as is the wish to keep one’s parents from worrying, and hopes to be home in time for what I assume is a child’s birthday party. Somehow, and I’m *sure* this wasn’t intentional, this post comes across as being somewhat misogynistic.
I thought her letter was carefully worded – “fed three meals a day and have a constant supply of fluids”? For all we know, it could be dog food and urine.
Funny how men think circumspect, thoughtful women as weak.
I totally agree with Catus, Dalton and lawgeek. (The Hound and I had a long discussion of this over dinner.) “three meals a day and a constant supply of fluids”?! Who talks like that? Someone being coached on exactly what to say, is who. If you were talking like a normal person you’d say “don’t worry, I have plenty to eat and drink.”
And if anyone’s wondering if Stockholm Syndrome could take root after only 3 days, remember that the syndrome takes its name from a hostage situation that was only six days long in total.
As I said, the other option is her having been betrayed by a defective training system.
Option 3 is that no training system, no matter how good, is going to be entirely effective against a captor with shall we say a very casual attitude toward the Geneva Convention.
There’s an interesting comment thread on a short Guardian online comment about the media coverage of Turney here:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/anne_perkins/2007/03/women_at_war_here_we.html