A Tale of Abductions and Discrepancies

By: Mathew Maavak and Rowan Wolf

The punditry and conspiracy theories were out as soon as Giuliana Sgrena was captured. She writes for the leftist newspaper Il Manifesto, and was abducted on Feb 4 by gunmen who blocked her car outside Baghdad University. The questions regarding the entire sequence of events are masked with confusion as disinformation and obfuscation seems to rule what is getting out.

Here are some stark facts:

* A little-known militant group, the Islamic Jihad Organisation, claimed to have kidnapped her to force Italy into withdrawing its troops from Iraq.

How absurd to kidnap and use someone who was in fact documenting civilian atrocities in Fallujah? Isn't it better to kidnap a pro-Berlusconi journo? Do the abductors deserve sympathy of any sort? For those suffering from Stockholm Syndrome by distant association, kindly send your daughter, wife or yourself to Iraq for "investigative reporting."

Sgregna was initially enraged: "How can you abduct me, if I am against the war?” According to the transcript of her interview with BBC. This carried weight with her kidnappers.

* She was in captivity for a month. She is 56-years-old.

It was darned stupid for the abductors to keep her that long, after her anti-US credentials were established, and to hold her as ransom for Italian troop withdrawal. She was in fact a betrayed ally, and one man eventually died. Very bad propaganda move, atrocious to the point that it looks highly fishy.

Sgrena had been shown pleading for her life in a video released by her kidnappers two weeks after her kidnapping in Baghdad. Sobbing and looking thinner, she delivered an impassioned message begging Rome to withdraw its troops from Iraq.” (AP, March 5, 2005). Decked in a green blouse too. Which sympathizing journalist would feel safe now, in Iraq? Sgregna wasn't in a good shape. So one has to wonder how the kidnappers shifted from the withdrawal of Italian troops to purportedly accepting a ransom for her release. Sgrena states she knows nothing of a ransom, the Italian government denies paying a ransom, and the hostage takers claim they never accepted any money for her release. Read it here.

Desktop punditry and knee-jerk commentaries are easy in late winter.

* The Iraqi clergy and people pleaded for her life

It’s true but release was achieved easily, through clerical help, in the case of two Indonesian journalists, Meutya Hafid and her cameraman Budiyanto just three weeks back. In fact, a hostage’s fate can depend on religion first, and nationality second. Muslim journalists who are not freed within a short period can be killed immediately for not toeing the line. Case in point is the Iraqi TV presenter Raiedah Mohammed Wageh Wazan. God only knows whose toes she stepped on. Her husband can offer no explanation himself. Maybe she being an Arab and a woman were factors.

* Sgrena was mysteriously told that the Americans would kill her.

Her abductors had impeccable intelligence that even the Italian secret service didn’t posses? The latter were actually waiting at the airport to pick her up. If the Americans wanted to kill her, couldn't the abductors warn of the dangers of an American checkpoint? They didn't tell Nicola Calipari, the Italian agent who negotiated her release, about this US plot?

First, they kidnap her, want her countrymen out, and now they are concerned for her life?

If the American threat was true, they could have donned her in a complete head to toe veil and slipped her to safety, the last chain being an Iraqi female stranger who could have led her to the Italians. Or better yet, announce publicly on any website or medium that Sgrena was deposited at such and such place. "Please take her back safely." With prior warning, clerical emissaries (plural) could have brought in US or coalition troops to rescue her even before thugs-for-ransom re-kidnapped her. Any snafu and the Americans get the blame.

* Once released, there appeared to be communications between Calipari, and US and Italian agents at the airport.

Don't get me wrong; the White House is indeed staffed by cretins, such the world has never seen. Case in point - George W. Bush.

But wouldn't it be egregious propaganda for the US to kill Sgrena now and that too using bullets? There was 30 minutes to prepare any "accident." The fallout has seen White House on the defensive. If a British woman was shot at the same way, and an SIS agent killed by US troops, Tony Blair might be out of the electoral race. They can't build alliances this way. They will lose Europe entirely. A few days after her video-taped plea was shown, half a million protestors were out in Rome, presumably against the kidnapping and against Italy's participation in Iraq. Italians are now particularly angry at Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi; Calipari's death was caused by the US army. Without some European support, the US occupation is doomed.

* Accounts that differ.

Any occupying army will want to dilute its responsibility in any accident. It has countless historical precedents.

Sgrena: "We weren't going particularly fast given that type of situation…. The driver had spoken twice to the embassy and to Italy to say we were on our way to the airport." (BBC, March 5).

Italian Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini’s explanation to his parliament:

As they neared the airport, the car slowed to about 40-km/h because the road was wet and because the driver had to make a sharp turning. Half way around the curve, a searchlight picked out the car and guns opened fire for 10-15 seconds. (Reuters, March 8)

The Italians claim two agents were wounded. The US army claims just one. Was the driver factored in?

* Accounts that tally:

Sgrena: "I was badly injured so I can't explain exactly what happened after because I was waiting for 20 minutes on the road for a military car to bring me to the hospital." (BBC, March 7).

Fini: After the volley of shots, "the intelligence officer who survived the attack was forced to kneel in the road until the soldiers realized who he was." US soldiers "profusely apologized." (Reuters, March 8).

* Conspiracy angle.

Very tenuous. US soldiers could have pumped their remaining bullets on them, autopsy or not, and disappeared. Instead, there was a call for a medical dispatch. If Calipari or Sgrena had learnt of something sinister earlier, they could have swapped them en route. Why take a chance? There were two others in the car, at least one of whom was an Italian agent.

She could have been saved Private Jessica Lynch-style by the US army to keep an ally's restive population in check.

"I believe, but it's only a hypothesis, that the happy ending to the negotiations must have been irksome," she said. "The Americans are against this type of operation. For them, war is war, human life doesn't count for much." (AP, March 7).

For all practical purposes, a rescued hostage, or her negotiator can provide valuable intelligence for the US army. Since her negotiator was a ranking Italian agent, it could have been forced out of him by an ally.

She wasn't the only one who documented the civilian casualties in Fallujah. The reports stretched for months. The BBC reported it somewhat the same way it reported the Jenin massacre. It was stark enough to prompt a Mumbai geek to ask:

What is happening to Fallujah?

"It's the birthplace of the fallooda," I snorted. "The Americans patented our centuries-old basmati and now they are trying to steal this recipe." (Maavak)

In the end, it has turned much more than a recipe for speculation. It's virtually a smorgasbord of confusion.

Sgrena: I can't say it (the shooting) was deliberate because we can't say if there was a lack of information. (BBC, March 7) The only thing that I promised and I want to guarantee to her (Calipari’s wife) is that we must know the truth, because such exceptional people cannot die for no reason…If someone is responsible, we need to know."(AP, March 7)

Even she is unsure.

Here is a line of reasoning. If the US and Italian agents were waiting at the airport, wouldn't it strongly indicate that they were privy to Calipari's negotiations, leading to Sgrena's release? Forget the actual speed notched, the driver was clearly wasting no time and he took a route that was probably familiar to him. He had 30 odd minutes to reach the airport. Wasn't the route chalked out for US soldiers to go a little easy? Weren't soldiers, with communications gear, warned of a hostage being rushed to the airport? There are reports stating that the road could only be used by approved people.

A fishy smorgasbord indeed.

Where lies the truth?

There is no doubt that Sgrena's car was fired upon as it made its way to the Baghdad Airport. The web of cover-up and denials is likely to mask if there was any intent by the U.S to stop Sgrena personally. However, the issue highlights a much larger problem which is neatly overlooked in the disinformation campaign, and that is the frequency of "mistakes" at U.S. checkpoints in Iraq. Read it here. The policy seems to be that if someone – or an approaching vehicle – makes one "nervous" then shoot first and ask questions later, as Al Jazeera claims. The fact that Sgrena's rescuers were traveling at night only increases the likelihood that it made US soldiers nervous. Common soldiers are not privy to conspiracy. They know that one goof up and they are dead. Veterans of Vietnam can tell you that.

Whether Italy paid a ransom or not, and whether that irritated the U.S. government, seem to be nonsensical in the outcome, though they fuel suspicions. If that was the motive for the attack, then what was the message the U.S. was sending? "If you pay a ransom and a hostage gets released we will kill them?: No that would truly be "reverse psychology." That is not to say it is impossible since the U.S. has had virtually no success on the other side of the equation which is securing the release of hostages from kidnappers. In fact, when kidnappers are caught, the U.S. is releasing them as "spies". Turning local rogues into spies makes perfect military sense. Despite all the talk about its polyglot society, The US army lags far behind the Brits at penetrating into a hostile alien culture.

Maybe we delve too deep into human psychology but exactly who is Sgrena angry at? Her abductors who forced to plead in a horrid state or the US army that initially coordinated her rescue with the Italians?

There was another absurdity that popped up. A translated interview of Hamid Mir was bandied about on the net. He eulogised Osama bin Laden's principled stance against the targeting of women and journalists. The Taliban and Al Qaeda "have lot of respect for women." You believe that? How many women died in Sept 11 alone? There are video clips of them plunging to their deaths.

Mir darkly insinuated about British and American "hotel journalism" and "spies" who used "Press cards." The subtextual message this man is hinting cannot be overestimated, though the use of spies is not without precedent. Journos beware!

Fact is many "hotel journalists" can't speak Arabic and rely on official US army statements and the ocassional translators. On April 8 2003, a US army tank had fired upon Baghdad's Hotel Palestine, killing Reuters photographer Taras Protsyuk (Ukraine) and Telenico cameraman Jose Couso (Spain). That hotel was a base for the foreign media. Once dead, they cease to be "spies"? US soldiers become "our poor kids" once they are dead. Otherwise, they are brute occupiers. That's the knee-jerk psychology of convenience.

Wouldn't Mir be a good target for interrogation since he claims to know bin Laden so well? Was this interview a masterful "black ops" intended to discredit subsequent publishers? It becomes "grey ops" when some are participants and the others, victims. The latter could include the original writers themselves. Somebody must have gauged the mood too well...

By the way, where is the greatest terrorist in history? The fifth anniversary of Sept 11 is around the corner. Does Mir know?

Copyright Mathew Maavak and Rowan Wolf, 2005

Posted by rowan at March 22, 2005 8:10 AM | TrackBack | [eMail this article!] |